I've been watching the Floyd case a lot lately and it just occurred to me that police work should be temporary the way jury duty is temporary. Maybe police officers could be selected from the population of citizens the same way that jurors are selected.
Or maybe it could be temporary the way military service is usually treated as temporary. You can make a career out of the military but few people do
But mostly I want to emphasize that if police officers were only there for a short while and they all had a "real" job somewhere that they were going back to then they would generally be much nicer to people that they were "policing", or at least police brutality wouldn't be as much of a thing because being a police officer wouldn't be a way of life for anyone
They would make it less of a point to enforce arbitrary regulations "by the book" and they would be more likely to "serve and protect" and "keep the peace"
And full disclaimer I hate the police in their current form. They've never saved my life but they've definitely taken my money in the form of speeding tickets when I was driving somewhere that it was definitely completely safe to go whatever speed I was going and I've never heard of anyone saying, "then the police arrived and thank God for that, because..." followed by some reason why their arrival was a good thing
Is this a joke?
There hasn't always been police departments believe it or not.
What was the murder rate back then?
Probably the same as it is now. Since when have police stopped murders?
LOL. You should look it up. We live in the safest period of our existence by a magnitude. Police patrols deter all crime. That is the entire point. Statistics clearly show this.
I can't understand why people think that back when people were free all they did was go around killing each other. People literally believe that traffic laws make the road safer, that gun laws reduce violence and that having a bunch of armed thugs driving around makes everyone behave better.
People have lives to live and when they turn to crime it's because the system of regulations and laws in the country have made it almost impossible to start or keep a business which causes less jobs to be created and therefore tilts the cost-benefit calculation in favor of doing something completely illegal.
If you already have to be doing something illegal to have a business in the first place, why not sell illegal drugs? At least then your customers already expect to keep everything hush hush and any employees you hire aren't going to report you for not paying them minimum wage or unionize or rat on you for violating health and safety codes
What are you doing on this website if you believe that?
This site is about making America great again, I think the best way to do it is to give more people more freedom
Exactly, police don't make anyone safer, obviously you can't believe the statistics, they're all created by the same people that created the police force. They funded the creation of the police force, the propaganda that convinced everyone police were necessary AND the "independent" research groups that determined that everyone is now safer
nope
Read this you little entitled twat.
https://kekpe.pe/i/607d25b2e9bf6.jpeg
Firstly, what I love about this site is the fact that we can have these discussions and that sometimes people actually provide insight that I didn't already have.
So there's no need for name calling
And I'm also not sure what part of that came across as "entitled"
Anyway,
Police officers definitely endure a lot of shit on the job, never said they don't.
But a police officer's job generally consists of approaching people that are having one of the worst days or nights of their life, examining their behavior, and determining if they are technically in violation of some regulation.
If the answer is yes, they will often choose to proceed with ruining that person's life by the following:
When someone is charged with crimes it can lead to them having a criminal record.
When they have a criminal record they will often lose their job and be generally less employable
Additionally are the fines and the possible jail time.
Often, the suspect is impaired and when being faced with what they might realize is the end of their freedom or the end of their life as they know it, they will often get violent or resist arrest, which is a problem that wouldn't exist if the police hadn't shown up in the first place.
So what we have here is a situation in which some dude who's been taught that he's the law and is well-paid and well-equipped is driving around nailing people for, usually, a crime that can be summarized as, "not being at one's best" or maybe, "making a bad decision", and then creating the following situation:
(and this situation is my biggest concern, I've thought about this a lot. I really want people to analyze this.)
The court system now takes the convicted criminal's money, their job and makes it harder for them to get a new job.
This sounds to me like THE VERY LAST THING that any of us should want for someone that was already struggling through a hard time
It sounds to me like this is when the real criminals are created. They get left with no money, no job and no job opportunities. Turning to some kind of crime to make money would make sense at this point. If they did serve time in jail or prison then the only thing that happened during that time is that they gained connections in the criminal world and learned more about committing crimes and how to get away with crime by hearing about the different ways that their colleagues got caught and how to not make the same mistake that others have made.
I don't like what the Democrats are trying to do to the police force, they want to make the job hell so that only the bottom layers of society will dare do the job and will therefore be part of the dumb idiot force that will carry out their communist agenda. That transition has already started, who do you think is replacing all the cops that are resigning in record numbers?
But I also don't like the way cops affect the environment around them or the way they create problems when there aren't any. I believe people can take care of themselves and carry weapons for their own protection and that they should be able to do so without any trouble. I also think that there could be some kind of police force for special situations and that that force should be extremely limited and that they should not be responding to everything that anyone can come up with and ruining people's lives, collecting evidence of violations at every possible opportunity and creating more criminals.
You are this cynical about the police after getting one speeding ticket? Seriously? The key concept you leave out is personal responsibility, your responsibility to be a good citizen by obeying the law. If you think certain laws are unfair then try convincing your political representative to change it.
You seem to not realize that, regardless of endless amounts of daily evidence, there are irresponsible and sometimes just evil people with no respect for property or life. Sure, carry a firearm for self defense but someone has to be there to respond to crimes. Are 90 year olds grandmothers supposed to protect themselves from grown men? You live in a fucking fantasy land.
Everyone should be in charge of themselves. Each person has to work with their family, friends, churches, workplace etc. to preserve their own safety. No one needs to worry about the bad guys that are "out there somewhere"
You are dangerously naive.
you are dangerously fond of the ad hominem
Police departments as we now know them pretty much started to form in the second half of the 19th century. They were created to address a need. The idea was to have an impartial, professional constabulary that could enforce laws and maintain order without local prejudices guiding their decisions.
Too often, they have functioned as a sort of local army for the most powerful people in the community. That's very hard to avoid, though. No system has yet been devised in which the wealthy and powerful are held in equal esteem with the poor and powerless. Such a system would collapse immediately, anyway.
The police are simply an extension of local government. That local government will always have the appearance of being legal and constitutional. If a law or executive order is put in effect and not challenged by another branch of government, it is considered constitutional, at least until a successful challenge is mounted.
We like the police when they go confront dangerous people on our behalf, but we don't like them as much when we, say, disregard traffic laws. It's possible for a cop to safe a life at the beginning of his shift, and then enforce some petty dictate at the end of the same shift. But the enforcement mandates always come from the same place.
If you want a change in the way police operate, seize the power that guides them. It is childish to focus on the police as adversarial while ignoring the system that writes the laws that governs them and provides the incentive structure to do the job in the first place. If a cop is in good standing, then somebody is satisfied with what he is doing. If you want that somebody to be you, you'll have to increase your level of involvement.
If we can't hold the wealthy and powerful to the same standards as the poor, why can't we just not enforce any laws on anyone? Essentially, hold the poor to the same standard as the rich?
If no laws are enforced, the wealthy and powerful simply become warlords by forming their private armies. Then the law becomes whatever the warlord wants.
Government is force. No matter what ideas we write down on paper, the actual social order will be enforced violently. The question is how the power is concentrated. But it will never accidentally drift into the hands of the people. It would have to be seized and maintained by them.
How can we do that? Just by getting involved in politics?
If enough people in agreement do, yes. That doesn't mean it's simple, and it certainly isn't easy to maintain. America had the Constitution to guide it, and it still all went south.
If new people are guiding the direction of society, they will then tend to do the same things every other ruler has done. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Personally, I don't think human nature is compatible with a free society. I think we're probably closer to natural monarchists, as a species.
Either way, people who aren't ready to fight for what they want will be stuck with what their masters allow.