How It Is That Bad Cops Are The Majority Of Cops

[Shadow Wolf]

Regardless of training, when you judge someone based on them being a member of a group rather than because of what they actually did, That's called bigotry

Judging a whole group based on their training when that training encourages abd promotes violence is not bigotry. It's not bigotry to realize the same thing happening again and again, including good cops facing retaliation for speaking out amd acting against bad ones (like a pig who choked his fellow officer whem she told him no more and all the pigs around them who did nothing).
If there were more cops not tolerating the abuse and corruption you'd have a point. But the very few who do tend to get beaten and severally so.
See, the thing is, bigotry is irrational. We know black people don't commit the most crimes. That's white color professionals, who themselves as a group is mostly white. Black people, especially young black men, just get arrested a lot more than others.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If a doctors office I have been going to has a bad doctor who gets fired for malpractice, I find a new clinic and set of doctors. Doesn't matter whether it was mine or not, the lack of oversight is enough to lose trust in the institution.
overall.

Wouldn't you consider the circumstances and what happened? Like if the doctor was an independent contractor, in a different department, or how widespread the problem is?
I think this relates as individual police precincts tend to have high levels of autonomy amd act mostly independent and largely free of federal oversights and varying state and local regulations, but we see the same problems everywhere.

 

[Kfox]

Not really. Because I didn't say all cops are bad.

But the bad cops there are, are making the rest of them look bad.

If a doctors office I have been going to has a bad doctor who gets fired for malpractice, I find a new clinic and set of doctors. Doesn't matter whether it was mine or not, the lack of oversight is enough to lose trust in the institution.
overall.

See the problem is, we can't shop around for a better legal system or PD, when that institution is safe harboring wrong doing, instead we're stuck with cover ups and back pedalling.

I understand what you are saying, but the point of this thread is that the vast majority are bad, and this accusation is made with out any evidence to support it. that is what I was responding to.

 

[Kfox]

Judging a whole group based on their training when that training encourages abd promotes violence is not bigotry. It's not bigotry to realize the same thing happening again and again,

Just because it happens again and again; does not mean it happens everywhere.

 

[The Hammer]

Wouldn't you consider the circumstances and what happened? Like if the doctor was an independent contractor, in a different department, or how widespread the problem is?
I think this relates as individual police precincts tend to have high levels of autonomy amd act mostly independent and largely free of federal oversights and varying state and local regulations, but we see the same problems everywhere.

Depends on the nature of the doctors office. But honestly, no. I have no desire to investigate. Because one **** up, means @ least several more accomplices, because no one gets way with **** in n environment like that without someone knowing and ignoring it.

 

[Revoltingest]

Are you saying that cops are bad...

Not all.

....and that we'd be better off w/o them?

You'll notice I never said that.
Instead, I'd proposed more stringent vetting of applicants,
much longer & better training, better supervision, higher
pay, & more accountability.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Not all.

You'll notice I never said that.
Instead, I'd proposed more stringent vetting of applicants,
much longer & better training, better supervision, higher
pay, & more accountability.

I would have a very, very hard time arguing with that.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I would have a very, very hard time arguing with that.

Only thing I'd add is federal oversight and a database to ensure bad cops are banned from being cops again.
By the very nature of the job it should be understood that being a cop is a privilege, and high standards must be upheld.

 

[Revoltingest]

I would have a very, very hard time arguing with that.

It's easy!
Just ignore what I actually post.
Assume something else.
Then argue against that.
Many on RF use that tactic.
Why can't you?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

It's easy!
Just ignore what I actually post.
Assume something else.
Then argue against that.
Many on RF use that tactic.
Why can't you?

Because I don't like it when people do it to me. Golden Rule and all that, you know.

 

[Revoltingest]

Because I don't like it when people do it to me. Golden Rule and all that, you know.

Wouldn't it be so much easier if people quoted
posts, & addressed those, instead of using
impressions or inventions, eh.

 

[Revoltingest]

Only thing I'd add is federal oversight and a database to ensure bad cops are banned from being cops again.
By the very nature of the job it should be understood that being a cop is a privilege, and high standards must be upheld.

As things stand, many bad cops escape being
disciplined for illegal acts by simply resigning.
Then they go to some other department, &
start all over again.
It's like pedophile priests being shuttled from
parish to parish to enjoy fresh meat.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Wouldn't it be so much easier if people quoted
posts, & addressed those, instead of using
impressions or inventions, eh.

That would be nice. Not going to happen though.

I've noticed, of late, that when someone posts an argument concerning, say, the year of Jesus's birth, they are not actually looking to learn anything, even (or perhaps especially) when they solicit real commentary. Rather, they reject anything that doesn't support whatever hypothesis they've secretly got in mind, and raise irrelevancies in order to steer others towards that hypothesis.

I've been trapped too many times in such threads here on RF, by people pretending that they're truly interested in seeking/learning the truth, while their hidden agenda is anything but. I hate it when I finally figure out I've been doing research for no reason whatever.

 

[Kfox]

You'll notice I never said that.
Instead, I'd proposed more stringent vetting of applicants,
much longer & better training, better supervision, higher
pay, & more accountability.

How do you know they aren't already getting all of that?

 

[Revoltingest]

How do you know they aren't already getting all of that?

Because I've looked into it a great deal.

Your question is odd. I propose changes,
yet you ask if the changes I propose have
already happened. Why propose changing
things to be what they already are, eh.

 

[Kfox]

Because I've looked into it a great deal.

Your question is odd. I propose changes,
yet you ask if the changes I propose have
already happened. Why propose changing
things to be what they already are, eh.

You missed my point. Your solution was that they should be doing "more" of what they are already doing. How much is more? No matter how much is done, you can always say do more, so to only say something as vague as "more" says nothing unless you get into the details of how much you actually want done.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Wouldn't it be so much easier if people quoted
posts, & addressed those, instead of using
impressions or inventions, eh.

Id settle for a quotee no longer saying "you said z you evil *******" when the post quoted said "a and b leads to c, which research d suggests improves e."

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Your solution was that they should be doing "more" of what they are already doing.

Where are they getting rid of qualified immunity?

 

[Kfox]

Where are they getting rid of qualified immunity?

He didn’t mention that. He said

*Vetting applicants
*Longer and better training,
*Better supervision,
*Higher pay
*More accountability

All of which are already done.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

He didn’t mention that. He said

*Vetting applicants
*Longer and better training,
*Better supervision,
*Higher pay
*More accountability

All of which are already done.

Vetting? Longer ajd better training? Better supervision? More accountability? A few isolated incidents doesn't mean the system is changing.
And, yes, he does indeed go on many long winded rants about the cruelty and destructiveness of qualified immunity.