Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Militarization of the police in the United States

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • @Z,
    Why there would be any sanction at all for a cop if the Supreme Court said it's not their job?

    @ Monash:
    It's 800 uses in the last 6 months of 2009, not for a whole year.
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

    Comment


    • Sorry, me bad. Posted in haste without proofing.
      Last edited by Monash; 24 Aug 13,, 10:25.
      If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.

      Comment


      • [QUOTE=Gun Grape;923974]
        Originally posted by zraver View Post

        Or if he was trying to protect the illegal marijuana plants that he was growing in the basement. 16 plants goes way above "Personal Use". Guess he didn't notice the police cars either when he exited the house and went to his shed either.

        And thats a prime example of why cops have to go in heavy. Mans growing dope in his home and shoots the cops as they enter. Another scumbag off the streets. Glad he saved the taxpayers money by hanging his self. And the "former combat vet" crap doesn't carry water. If he was doing the right thing he wouldn't have been in the situation.

        16 plants is not more than personal use. If they where all 2M tall trees perhaps but it takes months for plants to mature. If he was growing from seed more than half of said 16 plants will be garbage.

        Basing a charge off plants count is misleading.

        Did he have multiple grow rooms with a mother plant to have a constant supply indicating a supplier or was it one room where he was growing his annual or bi-annul crop to see him through the year.


        Furthermore, just because one smokes or grows marijuana it does not make one a scum bag. I grew weed at Sensi Seeds in Amsterdam as a tax paying job. I also quite enjoy marijuana especially now that I'm older and my hang overs are starting to really suck. I am far from being a scum bag.



        The cops could have knocked or called or any number of options before kicking the door in. It's not like they where raiding a fortified Hells Angels meth lab.


        Either way, two dead men over 16 evil weed plants.

        I'm a big fan of America but this kind of crap still happening South of my border is ridiculous. Forcing your morals on people you disagree with sure has been bloody.

        Celebrating the death of a man in his own home over 16 plants is way more scummy than the fact that I and countless others enjoy something you don't like.


        Normally I'm on side with your opinions but not this one Gun Grape.
        Originally posted by GVChamp
        College students are very, very, very dumb. But that's what you get when the government subsidizes children to sit in the middle of a corn field to drink alcohol and fuck.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Doktor View Post
          @Z,
          Why there would be any sanction at all for a cop if the Supreme Court said it's not their job?
          A cops job is to keep the peace and generate revenue, not protect citizens or enforce any particular law.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by zraver View Post
            A cops job is to keep the peace and generate revenue, not protect citizens or enforce any particular law.
            Since when are these mutually exclusive, by keeping the peace the lives and property of citizens are protected, by generating revenue (imposing fines) you also modify anti-social behaviors like speeding and littering. Don't impose a fine and people will speed and park where they want result - more motor accidents and grid locked streets. Fines are imposed because they deter further offending without the need to impose short periods of imprisonment for minor misdemeanors. And yes governments do use fines as a means of revenue raising but that doesn't alter the fact that they also serve as a means of modifying behavior - if only because we all hate paying them.
            If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Monash View Post
              Since when are these mutually exclusive, by keeping the peace the lives and property of citizens are protected, by generating revenue (imposing fines) you also modify anti-social behaviors like speeding and littering. Don't impose a fine and people will speed and park where they want result - more motor accidents and grid locked streets.
              Mind if I ask a German for a second opinion about that the more accidents thing? You seem to approach the general citizen as a lawless anarchist just waiting for you to not be looking so they can commit some offense. I don't litter because I am not a litter bug. It has nothing to do with fines. Same reason I do not park in handicapped spots or where I block access. because I am socially aware and courteous. My biggest sin as it were is speeding. Give me a fast car and I tend drive fast on the interstate. And there is zero correlation between moderate speeding on open roads in clear weather and accidents.


              Fines are imposed because they deter further offending without the need to impose short periods of imprisonment for minor misdemeanors. And yes governments do use fines as a means of revenue raising but that doesn't alter the fact that they also serve as a means of modifying behavior - if only because we all hate paying them.
              Fines do not deter, social awareness does. If you have awareness, you are socially responsible, if you don't, you are not. But as posted earlier in the thread, abuses of power like civil forfeiture of cash and property without criminal charges ever being filed have zero to do with litter control and parking.

              Comment


              • Z,

                Can you then explain to me how our immigrants are socially aware when abroad and suddenly become unaware when back home?

                I would say it is all about blending in the group.
                No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                  Mind if I ask a German for a second opinion about that the more accidents thing? You seem to approach the general citizen as a lawless anarchist just waiting for you to not be looking so they can commit some offense.
                  Z, it maybe stating the obvious but all the worlds roads are not autobahns, for that matter not all roads in Germany are autobahns either. Perhaps if they were speeding tickets would be irrelevant but they're not and each year across the continental United States thousands of lives are ended or ruined by motor vehicle accidents so that is hardly a valid point. As for my approach to the 'general citizen' nowhere have I ever suggested that the average person is a lawless anarchist. I don't live in a Mad Max movie and neither do you. I do however live in a normal community and from time to time some members of that community (a small %) commit crimes. An even smaller % become career criminals. Pretending that this wasn't the case would be silly, your not that silly and neither am I.

                  Originally posted by zraver View Post
                  I don't litter because I am not a litter bug. It has nothing to do with fines. Same reason I do not park in handicapped spots or where I block access. because I am socially aware and courteous. My biggest sin as it were is speeding. Give me a fast car and I tend drive fast on the interstate. And there is zero correlation between moderate speeding on open roads in clear weather and accidents.
                  You may not litter, but others do (obviously because you only have to look around to see litter). You may not park in a handicapped spaces but other more selfish people do (otherwise parking officers would be out of work.) You may be socially aware and conscious but that doesn't mean all other members of your community are equally socially aware and courteous. I would also add that everyone has their failings and moral blind spots, even if only occasionally which brings me to your self professed tendency to speed on interstates.

                  It is an undeniable fact that speeding is a factor in the majority of road accidents. This is because 'speeding' is a relative term, effected by variables including weather conditions, road surface, traffic density, driver fatigue and experience etc. A safe speed on a given stretch of road, even the posted speed limit can quickly become an unsafe speed when one of the above variables changes significantly. You might regard yourself as a good driver, hell you might be a good driver by any objective measure of the word, the problem is the morgues are full of people you believed they were good and just got tired, careless or unlucky.

                  The posted speeds generally reflect a safe (if very conservative) recommended top speed under normal driving conditions. By all means ignore them if you want, but fair cop :) take the penalty when you get caught and remember that just because you may be a good driver it doesn't mean that the other guy speeding down that interstate towards you is also that good. Attending fatal traffic accidents and watching dead bodies (especially kids) get pealed out of car wrecks gets gives you a whole new perspective on speeding which is why Traffic Cops and highway patrolmen can be real hard cases at times.

                  Originally posted by zraver View Post
                  Fines do not deter, social awareness does. If you have awareness, you are socially responsible, if you don't, you are not. But as posted earlier in the thread, abuses of power like civil forfeiture of cash and property without criminal charges ever being filed have zero to do with litter control and parking.
                  Disagree completely about the fines, just as a thought experiment imagine what would happen if your nearest city publicly announced that from tomorrow there would be no fines for illegal parking. Now flash forward one year and imagine what would be happening to that cities streets. Stop enforcing the rules and over time people would stop obeying them if only because they saw others doing so and getting away with it - its human nature, and only a small % of the community would be principled or strong willed enough to keep obeying rules that entailed no penalty for the breach of same.

                  As for the civil forfeiture cases you refer to it seems obvious they can be abused if misapplied. Certainly on the basis of the examples/cases in this thread it would appear that some of the outcomes were and are unfair and if it were up to me they would be subject to review. Other applications of the same law might however be entirely justified. Some legislative or judicial review would appear to be in order in any case.

                  I might add that we use civil forfeiture in my jurisdiction as an effectively means of seizing the proceeds of crime. Disputed assets can be seized or frozen and the value of the assets has to be relatively high to justify the court costs but once proceedings are commenced the Crown has to prepare an asset betterment statement and provide other evidence showing the POI controls the assets. The 'owner' on the other hand has to produce evidence showing that he came to possess the asset via legal means. This is something which is very hard for a career criminal to do since he can't prove the asset came into his control via legitimate means if this is not the case.

                  Cheers
                  Last edited by Monash; 30 Aug 13,, 08:30.
                  If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Repatriated Canuck View Post


                    16 plants is not more than personal use. If they where all 2M tall trees perhaps but it takes months for plants to mature. If he was growing from seed more than half of said 16 plants will be garbage.

                    Basing a charge off plants count is misleading.
                    yea but they had Ex Girlfriends statement, and they had been observing him/the house

                    If your going to charge people with "Growing with intent to sell" how else do you base the charge?

                    Furthermore, just because one smokes or grows marijuana it does not make one a scum bag. I grew weed at Sensi Seeds in Amsterdam as a tax paying job. I also quite enjoy marijuana especially now that I'm older and my hang overs are starting to really suck. I am far from being a scum bag.
                    You misunderstood, or I wasn't clear.

                    I have always called for the legalization of drugs. I take a libertarian view of make them all legal. We are adults, let us decide what we want to do.
                    Its his other actions that make him a scumbag IMO

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Monash View Post
                      Z, it maybe stating the obvious but all the worlds roads are not autobahns, for that matter not all roads in Germany are autobahns either. Perhaps if they were speeding tickets would be irrelevant but they're not and each year across the continental United States thousands of lives are ended or ruined by motor vehicle accidents so that is hardly a valid point. As for my approach to the 'general citizen' nowhere have I ever suggested that the average person is a lawless anarchist. I don't live in a Mad Max movie and neither do you. I do however live in a normal community and from time to time some members of that community (a small %) commit crimes. An even smaller % become career criminals. Pretending that this wasn't the case would be silly, your not that silly and neither am I.
                      My point was that laws in the US go too far. I think we have more laws than the rest of the world combined.

                      You may not litter, but others do (obviously because you only have to look around to see litter). You may not park in a handicapped spaces but other more selfish people do (otherwise parking officers would be out of work.) You may be socially aware and conscious but that doesn't mean all other members of your community are equally socially aware and courteous. I would also add that everyone has their failings and moral blind spots, even if only occasionally which brings me to your self professed tendency to speed on interstates.
                      Surprisingly little litter in my area and I don't know anyone that ever got a ticket for littering. It might be that this is a socially aware college town.

                      It is an undeniable fact that speeding is a factor in the majority of road accidents. This is because 'speeding' is a relative term, effected by variables including weather conditions, road surface, traffic density, driver fatigue and experience etc. A safe speed on a given stretch of road, even the posted speed limit can quickly become an unsafe speed when one of the above variables changes significantly. You might regard yourself as a good driver, hell you might be a good driver by any objective measure of the word, the problem is the morgues are full of people you believed they were good and just got tired, careless or unlucky.
                      Driving too fast for conditions is a factor. Speed has to be dependent on conditions. Open interstate with light traffic the only real risk is a sudden blow on out a steer or sudden cardiac arrest. American interstate design can by and large can support a normal vehicle going 90mph safely. It can handle say a modded 350z at much higher speeds than that.

                      The posted speeds generally reflect a safe (if very conservative) recommended top speed under normal driving conditions. By all means ignore them if you want, but fair cop :) take the penalty when you get caught and remember that just because you may be a good driver it doesn't mean that the other guy speeding down that interstate towards you is also that good.
                      Yup, or pack more electronics to detect radar and lasers than an EF-18 Growler. My detector not only detects, but is undetectable and via my smart phone tracks my location and gets reports from other smart detectors in my area within the past 15 minutes.


                      Attending fatal traffic accidents and watching dead bodies (especially kids) get pealed out of car wrecks gets gives you a whole new perspective on speeding which is why Traffic Cops and highway patrolmen can be real hard cases at times.
                      I don't play in traffic


                      Disagree completely about the fines, just as a thought experiment imagine what would happen if your nearest city publicly announced that from tomorrow there would be no fines for illegal parking. Now flash forward one year and imagine what would be happening to that cities streets. Stop enforcing the rules and over time people would stop obeying them if only because they saw others doing so and getting away with it - its human nature, and only a small % of the community would be principled or strong willed enough to keep obeying rules that entailed no penalty for the breach of same.
                      I think its more culture than enforcement.

                      As for the civil forfeiture cases you refer to it seems obvious they can be abused if misapplied. Certainly on the basis of the examples/cases in this thread it would appear that some of the outcomes were and are unfair and if it were up to me they would be subject to review. Other applications of the same law might however be entirely justified. Some legislative or judicial review would appear to be in order in any case.
                      But in the US there is very little review and almost no recourse for the citizen.

                      I might add that we use civil forfeiture in my jurisdiction as an effectively means of seizing the proceeds of crime. Disputed assets can be seized or frozen and the value of the assets has to be relatively high to justify the court costs but once proceedings are commenced the Crown has to prepare an asset betterment statement and provide other evidence showing the POI controls the assets. The 'owner' on the other hand has to produce evidence showing that he came to possess the asset via legal means. This is something which is very hard for a career criminal to do since he can't prove the asset came into his control via legitimate means if this is not the case.

                      Cheers
                      If you think an asset is related to criminal activity, then charge the person with a specific crime, and put a freeze or hold on the asset and if the prosecution wins, take the asset as part of the judgement. Don't divorce the two to unfairly disadvantage the defendant who may be innocent.

                      Comment


                      • Further, having been denied entry and PA makes torturing an animal a felony offense the cop was acting under color of law and thus the citizen was entitled to act to stop the felony and defend what was his.
                        The jury really thought otherwise.

                        George Hitcho Jr. sentenced to death for murder of Freemansburg police officer Robert Lasso | lehighvalleylive.com
                        The jurors deliberated about two and a half hours before returning with the death sentence. The jury foreman said they found three mitigating factors that explained why Hitcho fired a shotgun into the base of the 31-year-old's skull, but they did not outweigh killing a police officer in the line of duty. The same jurors on May 17 found him guilty of first-degree murder.
                        Jurors approve death penalty for murderer of Freemansburg cop - Morning Call
                        On Aug. 11, Lasso was at Hitcho's New Street home after being called for an argument between Hitcho and a neighbor. The 31-year-old officer was being attacked by Hitcho's dogs and was moving to use his stun gun against them when he was felled by a 12-gauge shotgun blast from behind.
                        Prosecutors argued that nothing in Hitcho's life offset his decision to shoot Lasso in the back of the head from feet away, killing him before he hit the ground.
                        ......
                        I think he meant your making light of cops killing our pets. A situation that has lead to situations where pet owners have no choice but to either watch their pets die or defend their kids. I said kids because there are multiple studies showing the person-pet bond mimics that of parent-child in the brain and this invites an entirely primal and visceral emotional response that has now lead to the predictable death of a cop.
                        They are not "children" or "little people" whether or not some person puts that value on them. No different then a goat, chicken, or any other potentially tasty creature or the animal which gave it's life for a very comfortable pair of boots.
                        To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                          If you think an asset is related to criminal activity, then charge the person with a specific crime, and put a freeze or hold on the asset and if the prosecution wins, take the asset as part of the judgement. Don't divorce the two to unfairly disadvantage the defendant who may be innocent.
                          The problem, especially with organized crime is that the principle beneficiaries go to great lengths to distance themselves from the criminal activity. They keep their money and assets close but large drug shipments, extortion rackets and stolen cars etc at a distance. To take a hypothetical example say a mid level 'suspected' drug dealer owns (or controls entities that own) a 1 million dollar home with no mortgage, two luxury sports cars, a forty foot power boat, a holiday apartment in climes sunny and some 'investments' in gold bullion. All on a declared income of say 60K a year from his 'job" as a used car salesman.

                          You might not have enough to convict him for drug offenses but you do your financial homework and then can use civil forfeiture orders to get him into court where he has to explain "where did you get the money for that?" If his income was $600,000 no problem he could probably account for everything so you wouldn't bother but since there's no way on God's green earth that he can have accumulated all those assets in just a few years legitimately with his declared income and if you can convince a court of that then he looses the lot or at least a large chunk of it, even if he doesn't go to jail for the drug shipment you were tracking in the first place.
                          Last edited by Monash; 31 Aug 13,, 09:01.
                          If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                            Yup, or pack more electronics to detect radar and lasers than an EF-18 Growler. My detector not only detects, but is undetectable and via my smart phone tracks my location and gets reports from other smart detectors in my area within the past 15 minutes.
                            Al that stuffs illegal over here. Anyway traffic authorities are thinking of extending a system they use to monitor heavy vehicles to all traffic on motorways and highways. They place automated cameras that track and record the rego details of every vehicle that passes under them mark across a highway and then at a measured fixed point further along the road they do the same thing again. Then a computer compares the time each vehicle crosses one line with the time they cross the next one, does a simple mathematical calculation and hey presto your toast. There's no way to beat it, unless of course you decide to pull over to the side of the road and wait out the clock until your elapsed time equals the speed limit - which sort of defeats the purpose of speeding in the first place.
                            If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.

                            Comment


                            • Unless you are adrenaline addict who loves the speed and would do just that. Those systems are usually very well marked and there is a sign 1km in front (at least in Italy, where they call it TUDOR).

                              Anyway, even if caught speeding my guess is there wont be a SWAT team delivering you the ticket. That was the topic, right?
                              No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                              To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Doktor View Post
                                Unless you are adrenaline addict who loves the speed and would do just that. Those systems are usually very well marked and there is a sign 1km in front (at least in Italy, where they call it TUDOR).

                                Anyway, even if caught speeding my guess is there wont be a SWAT team delivering you the ticket. That was the topic, right?
                                Yep, just pointing out to Z that he could wire up his car like an AWAC and the authorities would still be able to catch him speeding if they introduced a system like Tudor.
                                If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X