Is America a Police state?

[Robert.Evans]

what im saying is if someone is repeatedly punching you in the head and you slam them to the ground, are you in the wrong was that unnecessary force .

No it wasn't. Are you saying that happens, and that you might be changed for it?

 

[Robert.Evans]

Why don't police in other countries handle situation like they do here? In LA alone, cops fire more bullets than every cop in Germany combined.

You have guns in US though

 

[Robert.Evans]

picture this people are protesting something its starting to turn violent officers are trying to control the situation and one cop does something stupid like that do you abandon your post and tackle that officer and let your section get out of control or do you tell him to stop wait for the situation to resolve itself and then launch an internal investigation.

i guess what you're saying is you need a policeman to police the police. someone to supervise, observe, that can deal with such situations but is not active in it

 

[Robert.Evans]

That doesn't explain the difference. Here police routinely execute people, even if they are fleeing and unarmed. Cops very rarely face the consequences of their actions. Police have even tried to take advantage of their position and place themselves above the law. The ones that don't aren't really saying or doing anything about it. All of that needs to end.

I kinda agree with you...but, The problem is, what is the point of having a gun if you don't use it? If the criminal just throws his down (which he surely was prepared to use) and runs, you would never catch anyone. To run from the law is to abuse everyone and not care about anyone. I think if the police stay stop, you stop. That is not difficult I think.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Then everyone hates them even more when the cops show up and immediately kill someone.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-wielding-screwdriver-caught-body-camera.html

There is no shortage of similar stories. Realistically, unless your life is in danger you are better off not calling the police. And even if your life is in danger, you are probably better off defending yourself first, then calling police as the chances of them arriving in time are slim.

That vid was just horrendous. Thanks for sharing. RT is a good news channel. Considering the guy was smaller, obviously drunk, why couldn't the officer have just tackeld him? He turned from him, probably didn't respond, and then shot at him several times. Talk about an over reaction. He shouldn't be let lose with a hose pipe let alone a gun. Completely wrong judgement. Fear of death can do strange things to people, eh.

 

[Robert.Evans]

without audio its impossible to tell what happens did the cop tell him not to move. he was reaching for something was it a gun. did he say im going to kill you cop before reaching for whatever it was. every detail is key.

Don't agree. The cop could have hid behind his car some distance away. He puts himself in the danger area, sees a reaction he doesn't like, and kills him. That's plain wrong. No justification for that. He could be drunk, on drugs, on medication, he may have some medical problem, may have fallen and be concussed. No justification whatsoever. Stay at a distance first and observe.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Your reasoning is a big part of the problem with police in the US today.

Though I agree with you, I do think that they are a target as they are so easily recognisable because of their uniform. It immediately means trouble. People feel threatened and flee, fight etc.

 

[Robert.Evans]

if that's the problem then its not police at all that's what you learn at the academy so the problem must lie in the academy teaching which are given by government officials.

I think to a degree that is right. You go to a situation, assuming that if you are called, there is a reason- it is not to play ping-pong, right. So the edge is already there. If you stay too far away, perhaps the general public are hurt. If you are too close (as the shot drunk) then you put yourself in the firing line, but you also then have to react. Perhaps someone should invent fast acting drugs that could fired. Problem solved. Too much money spent flying into space.

 

[Robert.Evans]

That is irrelevant to the point being made. The point being that American soldiers are expected to show far more restraint when dealing with potential terrorists in war than our own police officers are expected to show with our own civilians here at home. Which is the basis for the satirical article I posted earlier.

I recall on TV recently that three officers in UK (one female) called at a house of someone in a flat inside. He came to the door to find tasers pointing at him. They told him to lie on the floor which he wouldn't do. He did not look in the least bit threatening. The woman officer said that they were entitled to use the taser once they had given the warning and someone had not complied with it. Why didn't they use it then? Because they had positioned themselves wrongly, either side of the door and could have shot each other! But was there a need to shoot him? No. There were three coppers there that could have merely grabbed him!
Having said that, he was guilty of something, so they were expecting trouble.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Yup, those are more problems we have with police. Not only do they have lower standards for use of force than soldiers do, they also have less accountability. It's easier for a cop to get away with killing a US citizen than it is for a soldier to get away with killing an enemy combatant.

It used to be if they shot someone they were screwed if they didn't find a weapon to back up their "fear". Now it's just however they feel in the moment, whether it has any basis in reality or not. Like:

Officer: I feared for my life.
Investigator: Uh, you killed a seven year old girl asleep on a couch.
Officer: Yeah, uh, there was a lot of smoke from the flash bang.
Investigator: Well, alright then, I'm completely satisfied with this report. You sir, are an American hero. Consider the charges dropped!

Unfortunately, I didn't make up that exchange. True story.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/17/aiyana-stanley-jones-joseph-weekley-trial_n_5824684.html

Thanks for the link

I don't know what to say about it, it seems as though no one really knows. But the problem is in US you have easy acess to guns and the police are goiing into a house where a suspect murderer lives. My thinking is that they stay outside and try and contact those within. The ones living there must know who he is. Very dangerous situation as soon as you open that door.

 

[Valjean]

How is it that police in other countries manage to make arrests without carnage, often without even being armed?

Law enforcement in the US, IMHO, selects for authoritarian personalities.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarian_personality

Observations:
Police in the US routinely test subjects for deference and submissiveness with a series of apparently innocuous orders: "Put your cigarette out," "Put down your cellphone." &c. If compliance hesitation is noted the police feel justified in escalating the interaction.
Hesitation, lack submissiveness or asking questions can get you charged with resisting arrest.

Police routinely use the shock-and-awe tactic to create cause for arrest and additional charges.
A sudden, violent, over the top takedown, accompanied with shouted orders succeeds in sending the subject into psychic shock. The tactic is designed to render the subject incapable of formulating a decision to flee or retaliate, but he's rendered incapable of rational compliance with orders. His reptile brain takes over and he fights handcuffing and arrest. His police induced inability to co-operate ensures a valid charge of resisting arrest, disorderly conduct and, quite likely, assault on a police officer.
In my opinion, this is dirty pool.

 

[Valjean]

The latest Supreme Court decision raises the bar on citizen redress for police misconduct:
http://www.theguardian.com/law/2015...me-court-ruling-texas-officer-fleeing-suspect

Sotomayor:

“Chadrin Mullenix fired six rounds in the dark at a car traveling 85 miles per hour,” she wrote. “He did so without any training in that tactic, against the wait order of his superior officer, and less than a second before the car hit spike strips deployed to stop it.”

Note this was a summary judgement. There was no hearing, No arguments for or against the previous courts' findings of misconduct were heard.

Don't even think of fleeing the police from now on. The police may not hesitate to shoot with impunity for any minor infraction

 

[Robert.Evans]

The latest Supreme Court decision raises the bar on citizen redress for police misconduct:
http://www.theguardian.com/law/2015...me-court-ruling-texas-officer-fleeing-suspect

Sotomayor:

Note this was a summary judgement. There was no hearing, No arguments for or against the previous courts' findings of misconduct were heard.

Don't even think of fleeing the police from now on. The police may not hesitate to shoot with impunity for any minor infraction

Heck of a country, ain't it.

 

[Revoltingest]

The latest Supreme Court decision raises the bar on citizen redress for police misconduct:
http://www.theguardian.com/law/2015...me-court-ruling-texas-officer-fleeing-suspect

Sotomayor:

Note this was a summary judgement. There was no hearing, No arguments for or against the previous courts' findings of misconduct were heard.

Don't even think of fleeing the police from now on. The police may not hesitate to shoot with impunity for any minor infraction

I can see where the cop's shooting was less than criminal in this particular case.
Proper though? No.

 

[Apex]

Though I agree with you, I do think that they are a target as they are so easily recognisable because of their uniform. It immediately means trouble. People feel threatened and flee, fight etc.

Maybe people feel threatened because police have a reputation of making bad situations worse.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

you can sit and nit pic at what you see on video but you have never been in a situation like that you don't know how you would react second he was given an order and did not follow it he when for something in is jacket its justified that's why she was acquitted.

Not exactly like that, but I have been in some nasty situations. And there is still the question of why don't police in other places act like this? In England they don't have guns. In Japan if their police acted like ours then their police would be killing more people than civilians. In Germany the police aren't killing citizens like this either.

if you knew anything about tazers you would know he was convulsing from musle twitch after the tazer she did not taze him the whole time.

The point was is that he was clearly incapacitated, in state to defend himself or attack, and he was shot dead. Tasers were supposed to have prevented this sort thing, and even on video they still behave this way and still rarely face the consequences of their actions.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The problem is, what is the point of having a gun if you don't use it?

If you have one, why should you want to use it? Clearly we have too many shootings that involve unarmed people. They should be used if necessary, but clearly too many police are too willing to use their gun. If the job is that stressful (and I don't doubt it is), then there needs to be better ways to filter out the bullies with a badge, perhaps maybe even limiting their time on street duty before they are rotated to a less stressful position for awhile.

If the criminal just throws his down (which he surely was prepared to use) and runs, you would never catch anyone.

They can run after them. They have dogs for running after people.

To run from the law is to abuse everyone and not care about anyone.

It's not really abuse, and not really saying you care about no one, but clearly it is something that is to be expected. For whatever the reason someone decides to run, it is never grounds for execution, especially if they are unarmed.

 

[Robert.Evans]

If you have one, why should you want to use it? Clearly we have too many shootings that involve unarmed people. They should be used if necessary, but clearly too many police are too willing to use their gun. If the job is that stressful (and I don't doubt it is), then there needs to be better ways to filter out the bullies with a badge, perhaps maybe even limiting their time on street duty before they are rotated to a less stressful position for awhile.

They can run after them. They have dogs for running after people.

It's not really abuse, and not really saying you care about no one, but clearly it is something that is to be expected. For whatever the reason someone decides to run, it is never grounds for execution, especially if they are unarmed.

What I see on TV of US coppers, I don't think they could run. Waddle maybe

I think one day they will find a drug that is ultra quick acting. Then it will be problem solved and we will sit and talk about the days when they used to use lead bullets and people ACTUALLY died from it rather than the drug.

I will tell you what I saw on RT news I think, a few months ago. A man was pulled over, old man; asked to get out of the car; four coppers; the man was quite, slow, and reached (can you see where this is going?) across to undo his belt (even I could see that) and the copper immediatley starting trying to drag him out of the car. Eventually the coppers dragged him out, forced him face down onto the concrete, busting the side of his head open sufficiently to leave a desert spoon full or red blood there. What had he done?
How would I react in US? I don't think I would move. I would keep my hands up where they could see them and tell them I was wearing a belt that had to be undone. (I don't blame the old man) But I say this that it might help you. "perceived threat"

 

[bluegoo300]

It is difficult working with the public, I agree. That can be really hard. I have worked with them, and soon as you put a uniform on, whatever uniform it might be, you are a target. But I do think under certain stresses, the police should be allowed to react. I do not agree with people hurling abuse at someone (police or otherwise) and getting away with it just because there are a large number of them. To me, the law still applies. Unfortunately in those situations, it doesn't.

I think the police could work more with showing they are on the communities side, standing together against crime. What I see is a police force that wants you to know they have more power than you. That is a fundamental problem. People will react.

your posts are very unbiased and that the way it should be I agree with you. I feel there are problems with the way law enforcement is handled however I think the same can be said about any job.

 

[bluegoo300]

No it wasn't. Are you saying that happens, and that you might be changed for it?

yes absolutely just a few weeks against something like that happen. an officer was trying to remove a kid from her class room and she started hitting him he then took her to the ground and was then fired do to media pressure.