Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Friday, July 10, 2020

New York's Finest are putting in for retirement faster than the NYPD can handle -- while citing a lack of respect and the loss of overtime pay, The Post has learned.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

This is a no win situation for the police. The entire county is against them, they are hearing these ACAB morons all day every day disparaging them, and seeing cities ram through changes that will only make their jobs insanely more difficult and expose them to law suits for just performing their duties.

Look, the nature of policing is always going to be adversarial. I get it. People don't like being caught and charged for whatever illegal crap they get up to. Even soccer moms get in on the action with their "I'm just late with my van load of kids doing 75 in a 55.... Don't you have real criminals to catch?" Stuff. But it's out of hand right now and the consequences are dire.

Are some cops racist? Damn Skippy. Is there way too much of a blue wall of silence? Of course. But making it easier for criminals to sue police officers, and gutting use of force guidelines is no answer. Does anyone here know why "qualified immunity" exists in the first place? I'll give you a hint: it has nothing to do with helping cops kill people. It's actually because desperate criminals caught in the act have this really annoying habit of grasping at straws and flailing wildly around for anything they can try to divert attention away from what they did. Claiming brutality and filing complaints is the number one response to being arrested. If the department suspended every officer without pay every time some petty thief filed a complaint, there wouldn't be anyone on the force to patrol the streets.

Police work is reactive, not proactive. It can't be. It tries to be, but it has minimal effect. Police respond to crimes and make sure that people that don't want to go to jail are apprehended, identified, and the facts are catalogued for the completely separate section of the country that deals with determining guilt: the courts.

The answer is simple: qualified immunity needs to stay, but decrease the amount of time between cases being adjudicated..... And increase civilian oversight of the adjudication process.

If this continues, we will see an increase in crime as bad guys are emboldened by the lack of a police presence..... And an increase in vigilantism, as citizens get frustrated with crime and a lack of police enforcement.

#1 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 12:18 PM | Reply

Good riddance to the ones that run away because they might have to start acting like human beings.

#2 | Posted by qcp at 2020-07-10 12:30 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You don't think the good ones are retiring too? Or did all of the bad ones just decide it was time?

#3 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 12:41 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

I think the bad ones want to retire to answer the question.

#4 | Posted by bocaink at 2020-07-10 12:53 PM | Reply

That's likely part of it. But most of it is guys recognizing they are about to have their legs cut out from uunder them and don't want to deal with the hassle. Take their pension which is about maxed out because of the forced overtime from this year, and find something else to do. Somewhere far from NYC where their pension goes a long way.... And they aren't around the increased crime from the exodus.

#5 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 01:10 PM | Reply

"most of it is guys recognizing they are about to have their legs cut out from uunder them and don't want to deal with the hassle."

Like I said, good riddance.

#6 | Posted by qcp at 2020-07-10 01:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"But most of it is guys recognizing they are about to have their legs cut out from uunder them and don't want to deal with the hassle"

Welcome to the 80s, NYPD!

#7 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 02:05 PM | Reply

with 11% unemployment this signals some available jobs

That used to be something the know-it-all's would be all virtue signaling over

When did the usual stickupthebutt "conservative" start --------- jobs?

Oh yes, that's right. Trump infected. Nothing is off the table when running interference for trump

#8 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2020-07-10 02:15 PM | Reply

Any cop who is caught on video abusing a suspect deserves to have his/her legs cut out from under them. I have no sympathy. If a cop feels they can't do the job without engaging abusive behavior, good riddance. We don't need them. I am so tired of law enforcement cheerleaders who pay lip service to the condemnation of police brutality but never support any substantive actions to end it.

#9 | Posted by moder8 at 2020-07-10 02:20 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

most of it is guys recognizing they are about to have their legs cut out from uunder them and don't want to deal with the hassle

Boo hoo. Why should i care?

#10 | Posted by JOE at 2020-07-10 02:23 PM | Reply

#10. Because with all of the crap being implemented, suspects are going to just claim abuse, to delay or detail the case against them.

Qualified immunity is supposed to protect offers from the prevalent false accusations from criminals trying to not face the music for their crimes.

Taking away their ability to be protected from these bullcrap claims, makes it harder to do their job.... Makes guys quit, and you end up with a more crime.

#11 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 02:30 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#9 there is literally no one that believes cops should get away abusing people, or arresting/harassing the innocent.

Literally not one person.

#12 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 02:32 PM | Reply

ABH, if a cop is caught on video abusing a suspect in violation of Department policies, of course the law should allow them to be sued personally. I am surprised that this would offend you.

#13 | Posted by moder8 at 2020-07-10 02:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#9 there is literally no one that believes cops should get away abusing people, or arresting/harassing the innocent.
Literally not one person.
#12 | POSTED BY ABH

So, what should happen to the cops who killed Breonna Taylor?
???

#14 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 02:35 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Bonus points: What should happen to the Buffalo cops who cracked the old man's skull?

#15 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 02:36 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#14 the incident should be investigated under civilian oversight. If the investigation proves the facts in evidence, they should be fired and charges filed. That's how the process is supposed to work. In her case, I believe it will.

The issue is, cops have complaints all day everyday and the overwhelming majority are absolute made up crap hoping it gets their case dropped.

And no, I think the should have qualified immunity from civil cased. Qualified immunity can be stripped by the courts in a case by case basis, which is how it should be. Otherwise endless civil lawsuits will waste police time.

That's why qualified immunity exists. To keep the criminals from abusing the system

#16 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 02:46 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Haven't you heard the Buffalo guy was a member of GrampiFa and was just about to go all ninja on those dozens of innocent policemen in full riot gear.

#17 | Posted by qcp at 2020-07-10 02:47 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

"The issue is, cops have complaints all day everyday and the overwhelming majority are absolute made up crap hoping it gets their case dropped."

Care to offer some sort of proof?

#18 | Posted by qcp at 2020-07-10 02:48 PM | Reply

#15 again, a credible investigation, civilian oversight, once adjudicated , fired, and charges filed. That can happen very quickly. But there should be a process....

That is another case where I believe the right thing will be done and the officers appropriately charged.

Removing protections from frivolous suits isn't the answer.

#19 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 02:50 PM | Reply

grampifa had electronic scanner to sniff out radio frequencies. Much fun to be had later when peaceful protesting start. Get on a radio and screw with police. You unamerican commie anarchists really need to leave like you said you would in 2016.

#20 | Posted by mutant at 2020-07-10 02:53 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

#14 the incident should be investigated under civilian oversight. If the investigation proves the facts in evidence, they should be fired and charges filed. That's how the process is supposed to work. In her case, I believe it will.

^
So, assuming it even gets to the DA's office, if the Grand Jury doesn't indict, that means the cops didn't get away with abusing people, despite shooting an innocent woman in her own bed.

Just give me a Yes or No answer, please, ABH.

#21 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 02:54 PM | Reply

Years ago after college I move to Queens NY for one of my first real jobs. I looked into being an Auxiliary Officer. I was really excited until they said I would get cuffs and a only a wood baton. I later moved to a different state that had reserve officers but let you carry a firearm if you passed qualifications. I did that for several years and it was a lot of fun. The Idea of patrolling the subway unarmed at night wasn't very appealing to me.

#22 | Posted by byrdman at 2020-07-10 02:55 PM | Reply

"#9 there is literally no one that believes cops should get away abusing people, or arresting/harassing the innocent."

Sure there are people that applaud police abuse....President Trump has made comments that he wants them to be rough with people they arrest...

"Trump to police: 'Please don't be too nice' to suspects"

"" -- President Donald Trump seemed to encourage police to be more violent in handling potential offenders during a speech to law enforcement officers today.

"Please don't be too nice," he said to the audience in Long Island, New York.

While the speech was largely focused on the fight against the gang MS-13, it appeared that Trump was directing his comments about police interactions with suspected criminals in general.

He described the precautions typically taken by police where they place a hand over a suspect's head while they're being put into a police car to protect them.

"When you see these thugs being thrown into the back of a paddy wagon, you just seen them thrown in, rough. I said, Please don't be too nice,'" he said."

abcnews.go.com

#23 | Posted by danni at 2020-07-10 02:57 PM | Reply

#22 Bernie Goetz, welcome to the Drudge Retort.

#24 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 02:58 PM | Reply

Here are some good statistics if you would like:

www.bjs.gov

8% sustained. In other words, 92% were crap.

Okay, here comes the "statistics can't be trusted because the system is rigged and yada yada yada yada..."

Please. Even if the rate of sustained was five times higher, it still wouldn't crack 50%.

#25 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 02:59 PM | Reply

"#9 there is literally no one that believes cops should get away abusing people, or arresting/harassing the innocent."

Let's talk about Trump's photo op at the church, shall we?

Those people who got tear gassed, what were they guilty of?

#26 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 02:59 PM | Reply

Because with all of the crap being implemented, suspects are going to just claim abuse, to delay or detail the case against them.

I was talking about police retirements, moron. Try to follow your own conversation instead of bouncing around to new topics every time someone responds to you.

#27 | Posted by JOE at 2020-07-10 03:00 PM | Reply

#21. Yes... Just like any other criminal that grand juries fail to iindict. Not sure how that's relevant. It literally happens every day. Even if the grand jury fails to indict, they are no longer wearing a badge.

#28 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 03:01 PM | Reply

#27 hey idiot... The part you quoted only discusses guys worrying about getting their legs cut out from under them. Try to pay attention to what you post.

#29 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 03:04 PM | Reply

"#21. Yes... Just like any other criminal that grand juries fail to iindict. Not sure how that's relevant."

It's relevant because the police and the DA are working for the same team.

You're not a cop? You've never testified on the DA's prosecution?
???

It's like you're saying OJ didn't kill Nicole and Ron because that's what the jury said.

Get it?

Of course you get it, you're just being obtuse.

They trained you well.

#30 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 03:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#25, You had to go back to numbers from 2002?!? How about something since the advent of body cameras at least.

#31 | Posted by qcp at 2020-07-10 03:05 PM | Reply

#26 their are a myriad of rules they likely broke. I worked in the federal law arena a long time ago. The secret service has broad authority to establish protection around the president. If he decides to go for a walk, they can declare the area a secure zone and anyone that won't leave is violating federal law, if I remember correctly. I would have to look up the appropriate us code to be sure.

I'm not saying it wasn't a colossally stupid decision, but that's not the fault of the secret service. Their job is to make sure he doesn't get hurt, they can't dictate his schedule.

#32 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 03:09 PM | Reply

#30. Nope. Certainly not a cop.

#33 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 03:10 PM | Reply

#22 Bernie Goetz, welcome to the Drudge Retort.

#24 | POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2020-07-10 02:58 PM |

I have never needed to draw my weapon. I guess my de-escalation tactics were pretty good.

#34 | Posted by byrdman at 2020-07-10 03:12 PM | Reply

#30. To expand grand juries get things wrong occasionally. Do you expect it to be 100% infallible when police are involved but a different standard when other members of society are brought up on charges?

#35 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 03:15 PM | Reply

#35: ABH: That is misleading. As the saying goes, a DA can usually get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. On the other it is extremely difficult to get them to indict cops by statistical comparison.

#36 | Posted by moder8 at 2020-07-10 03:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

To be clear, there are other ways to file charges that don't involve using the grand jury, but that's just splitting hairs.

#37 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 03:19 PM | Reply

Moder8 but is it because the case is weak? Or are you trying too say DAs mislead the grand jury..... That would be a bold charge I would like to see backed up.

#38 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 03:21 PM | Reply

The meatheads that want the cops gone are the first to sue if they don't show when called.
Well tuff $##t.

#39 | Posted by phesterOBoyle at 2020-07-10 03:32 PM | Reply

Moder8 but is it because the case is weak? Or are you trying too say DAs mislead the grand jury..... That would be a bold charge I would like to see backed up.

#38 | POSTED BY ABH

Grand Juries generally only see evidence that shows a crime was committed. Nothing exculpatory, etc. That's why its generally easy to get a Grand Jury to indict.

On the other hand, despite this, Grand Juries don't indict cops as often because they tend to give deference to the officers via bias.

#40 | Posted by Sycophant at 2020-07-10 03:34 PM | Reply

#29 My quote of your words was you whining about police retiring. I asked why i should care. Your response was to ramble on about crime spiking if QI is removed. Just ---- off, moron.

#41 | Posted by JOE at 2020-07-10 03:35 PM | Reply

The meatheads that want the cops gone are the first to sue if they don't show when called.
Well tuff $##t.

#39 | POSTED BY PHESTEROBOYLE

And still too dumb to understand what Defund the Police actually means.

Wish I could say I'm surprised.

Now go crawl back under your rock. The Adults are talking.

#42 | Posted by Sycophant at 2020-07-10 03:35 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It is because people in general defer to authority. And, related, it is generally people who are deferential to authority who volunteer to be grand jurors. And, related, it is generally people who are deferential to authority whom both judges and DAs like to have appointed to grand juries. When a DA tells them to indict someone, usually that person gets indicted. The exception often being cops, to whom grand jurors tend to be very deferential to.

#43 | Posted by moder8 at 2020-07-10 03:36 PM | Reply

#40 now take it to the point where you prove its because of bias. That's a bold thinly veiled charge of corruption.

#44 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 03:37 PM | Reply

#43. I'd actually be very curious to see what the indictment rate is for cops versus non cops.

#45 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 03:38 PM | Reply

#41. Damn gramps. Take some Metamucil....

#46 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 03:40 PM | Reply

Here are some good statistics if you would like:
www.bjs.gov
8% sustained. In other words, 92% were crap.
Okay, here comes the "statistics can't be trusted because the system is rigged and yada yada yada yada..."
Please. Even if the rate of sustained was five times higher, it still wouldn't crack 50%.
#25 | POSTED BY ABH

Cute.

That's only OF CLAIMS made. There are a host of excessive force complaints that aren't filed.

In addition, often when the department and/or city is sued, there is no citizen complaint filed. The case eventually is settled with no admission of wrong doing and life goes on.

You also ignore that 34% are not sustained in your article...meaning there isn't sufficient evidence to exonerate or confirm excessive force.

Yes, a lot of cases are bogus. But there are a lot of cases of excessive force as demonstrated during the protests in video after video.

By the way, your link is to an article using data from 2002.

By the way, to show how out of whack your link is, large municipal police departments averaged only 45 complaints in 2002. If you really think such departments only had people claiming excessive force that many times, you're nuts. They just don't file complaints to the department.

#47 | Posted by Sycophant at 2020-07-10 03:48 PM | Reply

"In addition, often when the department and/or city is sued, there is no citizen complaint filed. The case eventually is settled with no admission of wrong doing and life goes on.;

Can you prove that?

And yes I know it's from 2002. Didn't have time to do a deep Google dive

#48 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 04:00 PM | Reply

#26 their are a myriad of rules they likely broke. I worked in the federal law arena a long time ago. The secret service has broad authority to establish protection around the president.
#32 | Posted by ABH

Name literally any law they stood in violation of, by being peacefully assembled at the church.

Just try, okay?

Spoiler Alert: You won't try.

"I'm not saying it wasn't a colossally stupid decision, but that's not the fault of the secret service."

It wasn't even the Secret Service who tear gassed them. It was the Park Police.

Your ignorance is outclassed only by your willful ignorance.

Fact is, the police engaged in overwhelming force and domination. Against a peaceably assembled group of citizens. And you're okay with that.

But don't take my word for it!

D.C. had no problems last night. Many arrests. Great job done by all. Overwhelming force. Domination. Likewise, Minneapolis was great (thank you President Trump!). twitter.com

#49 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 04:15 PM | Reply

I worked in the federal law arena a long time ago..
#32 | POSTED BY ABH

#30. Nope. Certainly not a cop.
#33 | POSTED BY ABH

You worked for law enforcement, but you weren't a cop.
Were you a DA, who never indicted a single cop, then?

#50 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 04:17 PM | Reply

Try again. I Gave a hint up thread.

#51 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 04:22 PM | Reply

Oh sorry you quoted it. Nice try though, but there are no DAs in the federal system.

#52 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 04:22 PM | Reply

Or are you trying too say DAs mislead the grand jury
#38 | POSTED BY ABH

It's as simple as not presenting a compelling argument.
Have you read the indent report on Breonna Taylor's killing by police?
Go ahead and read it. It will take you less than sixty seconds.
htv-prod-media.s3.amazonaws.com

Tell me if you think this report would be helpful in securing an indictment against the named officers.
Notice the Forced Entry checkbox is "No."
Does that align with the facts?
Notice Breonna Taylor's injuries are listed as "None."
Does that align with the facts?

#53 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 04:24 PM | Reply

"Nice try though, but there are no DAs in the federal system."

Splitting hairs. There are US Attorneys in all 94 Federal districts.
But it sounds like you were a non-badge-carrying employee of the Secret Service.

#54 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 04:26 PM | Reply

Snoofy. I looked up the statutes I needed. Title 18 USC 3056. Look it up.

And yes establishing a federal secure zone that is mobile around a President is legal. And no the service wouldn't be large enough to enforce it by themselves so would naturally turn to the police force responsible for Lafayette Park right across the street from the WH

Sorry to interrupt your pre mature gloat

#55 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 04:27 PM | Reply

#40 now take it to the point where you prove its because of bias. That's a bold thinly veiled charge of corruption.
#44 | POSTED BY ABH

Go ahead and deny the system is corrupt again, after reading the incident report on Breonna Taylor's homicide by police.

#56 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 04:28 PM | Reply

#54. Thats funny. No. Over a dozen years ago I went corporate. Sold my soul or something like that.

#57 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 04:29 PM | Reply

#56. Can it be improved?. Of course. But to say the system is corrupt based on the actions in one case or even a few cherry picked cases of obviously corrupt cops doesn't prove what you think it does.

#58 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 04:35 PM | Reply

Title 18 USC 3056
18 U.S. Code 3056.Powers, authorities, and duties of United States Secret Service

Lafayette Square was cleared by Park Police and District of Columbia police, not by Secret Service.
Furthermore, the Attorney General explicity denies the line of reasoning you advanced:

Barr maintained that his decision to disperse the crowd followed signs that the crowd was "becoming increasingly unruly," and had nothing to do with the photo-op at the church.
"There was no correlation between our tactical plan of moving the perimeter out by one block and the President's going over to the church," Barr said.
www.cnn.com

#59 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 04:37 PM | Reply

"But to say the system is corrupt based on the actions in one case"

You want to discuss dozens of other cases, then?
What's the magic number, where it becomes corrupt?
You tell us.

#60 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 04:38 PM | Reply

#59 interesting. Not sure how they justified that then. I didn't pay attention to the case. Looks like I need to read further into it.

I appreciate the link

#61 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 04:42 PM | Reply

#60. I don't know what the number is. But for each case of corruption you cite, their are literally thousands of clean cases traveling the courts, from tickets to murders, to international drug smuggling.

The system needs to get better at finding corruption and disposing of it, but throwing the baby out with the bathwater, ain't it.

And these moves..... And bringing it back around to the crux of this article's...
is driving out good cops because are being persecuted by rash decisions that will endanger them.

#62 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 04:45 PM | Reply

"The already difficult task of prosecuting police officers accused of criminal offenses is compounded by Georgia state law that allows special privileges for public officials, including police officers, during grand jury proceedings."
www.hrw.org

...

The balance tips toward the police from the start: In most felony cases, an arrest is made and a grand jury indictment follows within a prescribed period of time. But in police fatality cases, prosecutors generally use special grand juries sitting for lengthy periods to investigate and gather evidence before determining if an arrest and indictment are warranted.

Another hurdle is the law itself. Most states give officers wide discretion to use whatever force they reasonably believe is necessary to make an arrest or to protect themselves, a standard that hinges on the officer's perceptions of danger during the encounter, legal scholars and criminologists say.

"The whole process is really reluctant to criminalize police behavior," said Eugene O'Donnell, a former prosecutor who teaches at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in Manhattan. "The grand jurors are, the jurors are, the judges are, the appellate courts are."
www.nytimes.com

...

The mere fact that a District Attorney has presented the case of alleged police use of unreasonable force to a Grand Jury really means that the DA has no desire to prosecute the police officer. Otherwise, the DA would have simply filed a Felony Complaint, had the police officer arrested, and prosecute the officer.
steeringlaw.com

...

The Brunswick district attorney who is facing a state and federal investigation for her actions in the Ahmaud Arbery case has removed herself from another high-profile criminal case in Glynn County.
www.ajc.com

#63 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 04:46 PM | Reply

"Not sure how they justified that then."

But you're still sure it was justified.
Get it?

Do you get it, or not?

#64 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 04:47 PM | Reply

"#60. I don't know what the number is."

And yet you're still confident the system isn't corrupt.
You can't articulate the number that would get you to think otherwise.

Get it?
Can you see what you're doing here, or not?

#65 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 04:48 PM | Reply

#64. No I'm not sure. That's why I said thank you for the link so I can look into it. Take the victory with some grace. I'm not afraid to be admit I was wrong.

#65. Please. Now you're just being obtuse for the sake of being an axehole. Do you have a number that proves the entire system is corrupt and we can discount the thousands of clean cases traversing the system? Any number you or I say would be a joke. Be better....

#66 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 04:56 PM | Reply

"Do you have a number that proves the entire system is corrupt"

There's a zillion systems.
Each county has their own DA.
Then there's the States and the Feds.

You're dumbing it down in a way that demands an all or nothing answer, where one non-provably-corrupt system proves the entire system -- which doesn't even exist -- is innocent.

#67 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 05:02 PM | Reply

"we can discount the thousands of clean cases traversing the system?"

Back when I was a defense contractor, we said it only took one "Oh, no" to undo eighty "Attaboys."

What's your acceptable number of "Oh, noes?"

Is it worth going to war over one KIA?
We went to war in Vietnam over zero KIA, in what was pretty obviously even at the time and undisputed now to be a fabricated incident in the Gulf of Tonkin.

#68 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 05:06 PM | Reply

Are those goal posts heavy? You're trying to move them to argue now that there are certain systems that might be corrupt.... By region?. Let me know when those goal posts are getting cemented in.....

#69 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 05:09 PM | Reply

"The system needs to get better at finding corruption and disposing of it, but throwing the baby out with the bathwater, ain't it."

There comes a point where it is, though.
For example, the Boston Tea Party.
See Also: Declaration of Independence.

If the police kill you by kneeling on your neck for eight minutes and forty-six seconds for passing a counterfeit $20, will you die knowing you deserved it?

#70 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 05:11 PM | Reply

"Are those goal posts heavy?"

You're the one who removed them, by reducing the truth to some convenient fiction of single over-arching monolithic system.

I'd say the Kern County DA was rotten for how he handled the Bakersfield ritual child abuse witch-hunt in the 80s. I'm sure you remember the case, it was national news at the time. Do you agree?

#71 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 05:15 PM | Reply

"If the police kill you by kneeling on your neck for eight minutes and forty-six seconds for passing a counterfeit $20, will you die knowing you deserved it?"

Would he have really died had he not had COVID?

#72 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-07-10 05:23 PM | Reply

#43. I'd actually be very curious to see what the indictment rate is for cops versus non cops.
#45 | POSTED BY ABH

The go digging, like I did right here!
Tell me if you can spot the conflicts of interest, since you were trained extensively on that as a Federal employee:

Harris County grand juries have cleared HPD officers in shootings 288 consecutive times.

The Chronicle investigation also found that most judges in Harris County use a system to empanel grand juries that is discarded by nearly all other states because it can result in grand juries that are not diverse.

In addition, the person who oversaw the review of police shootings for the DA's office during most of the years covered by the Chronicle's investigation " Clint Greenwood " was a licensed peace officer. Greenwood served for nearly two decades as a reserve officer with the Harris County Precinct 4 Constable's Office, and after leaving the DA's office in January, he was hired as a major at the Harris County Sheriff's Office.

He also has had a successful practice as a private attorney defending police officers in lawsuits over shootings. Greenwood said his experience as an officer helped him see both sides of a police shooting case.
www.houstonchronicle.com

#73 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 05:25 PM | Reply

Would he have really died had he not had COVID?
#72 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Was COVID the cause of death, or was a knee on his neck the cause of death?
Let me kneel on your neck for eight minutes and forty-six seconds, and if you live, I'll see it your way, okay?

#74 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 05:26 PM | Reply

#71 please. You can't tell me that you weren't arguing about the justice system as whole, the suddenly wanted to break it up when you knee you couldn't win in that garbage..... And then to bring up as an example a 30 to 40 year old cass I've never heard of, and no one that worked there at the time is likely to still be there?

Weird.

And that does absolutely nothing to address wether or not the use of force in any or all of those cases was completely justified.

There is a difference between the use of force in say the George Floyd, and say Rayshard Brooks cases....

#75 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 06:02 PM | Reply

"#71 please. You can't tell me that you weren't arguing about the justice system as whole"

Forest, meet trees.

Clearing Lafayette Square on the orders of the Attorney General, would you call that "the justice system as a whole?"
Because it's really only the Federal part.

The link I posted about Houston, that's really just about Houston.

I wouldn't say "as a whole."
I'd say "on the whole."

"And then to bring up as an example a 30 to 40 year old cass I've never heard of, and no one that worked there at the time is likely to still be there?"

You've heard about it now, and unless you're under 40, you certainly heard about it at the time. But hey, maybe you forgot. Read up on it. Was that DA rotten, or not? Then, ask yourself did the next DA do anything about the previous rotten one, or not?

#76 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 06:21 PM | Reply

"And that does absolutely nothing to address wether or not the use of force in any or all of those cases was completely justified."

Breonna Taylor, shot in her own bed.
Use of force justified, or not?
Or are you unable to have an opinion on the matter?

#77 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 06:22 PM | Reply

There is a difference between the use of force in say the George Floyd, and say Rayshard Brooks cases....
#75 | POSTED BY ABH

Yes, just like every tree in the forest is in fact different from the next.

But that doesn't mean there's no forest, now does it?

#78 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 06:23 PM | Reply

And again, you are being obtuse. Taylor doesn't live in Houston. So again, you have no evidence that all evidence points to 288 acceptable and reasonable uses of force.

#79 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 07:32 PM | Reply

Looks like the cops will have to have their body-cams turned on and functioning ALL the time. No excuses. Even more importantly, if both cops in the car have their cameras turned on and functioning, their version of the event will be corroborated!

#80 | Posted by john47 at 2020-07-10 08:16 PM | Reply

"Taylor doesn't live in Houston."

Nobody said she did.

You wrote
"#43. I'd actually be very curious to see what the indictment rate is for cops versus non cops."
I linked to Houston, where the rate for cops is 0 out of 288.

I guess you didn't want to know after all.

#81 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 08:34 PM | Reply

So again, you have no evidence that all evidence points to 288 acceptable and reasonable uses of force.
#79 | POSTED BY ABH

So you're just denying this means anything, then:

"The reality that police have been nearly immune from criminal charges in shootings concerns the most senior Harris County criminal judge, who noted that grand juries indict a much higher number of defendants in other types of cases." www.houstonchronicle.com

#82 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 08:37 PM | Reply

ABH,
Think this might be indicative to a corrupt system, or is this the way things ought to be?
Life in prison for selling $30 of marijuana
theappeal.org
(Spoiler alert: he's black)

#83 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 08:53 PM | Reply

How about here?
Was this just ten bad apples, not indicative of any larger pattern of conduct?
Will Smith says Philadelphia police called him the N-word on more than 10 occasions'
thegrio.com
"I grew up under, you know, Mayor (Frank) Rizzo. He went from the chief of police to becoming the mayor and he had an iron hand," said the actor, 51. "I've been called n" by the cops in Philly on more than 10 occasions, right? I got stopped frequently."

#84 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 08:57 PM | Reply

Just a fluke, or what?

"Nearly 70 percent of the 242 people exonerated by DNA testing to date are people of color."
www.innocenceproject.org

#85 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 08:58 PM | Reply

#80. I completely they agree that they should.

Snoofy. The system has allowed racism in its ranks for too long and in to great a degree. That is not a testament to a broken system, but the wrong people managing it in SOME instances. That needs to change.

Removing the protections police officers need in order to do their job effectively, is not the answer.

Much more civilian oversight, out of the hands of the police department, is the best solution. Not gutting their bedrock protections. We will see MANY more retirements of guys that wouldn't have normally retired this early in their careers.

#86 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 09:05 PM | Reply

"Removing the protections police officers need in order to do their job effectively, is not the answer."

Why isn't it?
Those are the very protections that let killer cops get away with being killer cops!

#87 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 09:07 PM | Reply

"We will see MANY more retirements of guys that wouldn't have normally retired this early in their careers."

Then you must not think they will be mostly drawn from "The system" that "has allowed racism in its ranks for too long and in to great a degree."

#88 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 09:09 PM | Reply

Perhaps snoofy I should posta link to every time as n officer rescues someone? Would that be an indication that the whole system is perfect? I can do that for every case of a police officer acting poorly. You can't have it both ways. If you want to throw up examples of bad cop behavior and say it shows the whole system is screwed up, then all the good stories must be an inducing the system is perfect....

The truth like with allay all things, the answer is somewhere in the middle. I think the system works as intended except in a small number of heinous and egregious cases. The facts that lead to them should be examined whenever they happen and changes made to ensure they don't happen again.

Youb want to destroy the system.

#89 | Posted by ABH at 2020-07-10 09:10 PM | Reply

"Youb want to destroy the system."

What's wrong with wanting to destroy a system that "has allowed racism in its ranks for too long and in to great a degree?"

You tell me.

#90 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 09:11 PM | Reply

"I think the system works as intended "

Me too.
I think one of the things the system is intended to do is to perpetuate blacks as second-class citizens.
As in, ""Nearly 70 percent of the 242 people exonerated by DNA testing to date are people of color."

You want to believe the system is achieving those outcomes inadvertently.
It's pure fantasy.

Cops didn't inadvertently or accidentally kill Breonna Taylor. They deliberately and purposefully shot her.

#91 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-07-10 09:14 PM | Reply

Would he have really died had he not had COVID?

#72 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

So it's his fault for having been ill? It's ok for police to kill people if they're already sick?

#92 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2020-07-11 11:41 AM | Reply

"And still too dumb to understand what Defund the Police actually means.
Wish I could say I'm surprised.
Now go crawl back under your rock. The Adults are talking.
#42 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT"

This thread is about police wanting to retire early.
It's not about defunding anything.
SYCO is a good name for you.

#93 | Posted by phesterOBoyle at 2020-07-11 12:12 PM | Reply

www.yahoo.com

Let's get rid of cops, defund them, at least make them less active, deplete their ranks and agree they suffer from systemic racism bred into their modes of behavior, always acting as if to be Black is to be guilty.

During the mayhem, the mayor said the time has come for protesters to leave. They didn't, and so the mayor signed an order telling police to evict them and recover the police headquarters.The protesters did not nod their heads, pack their bags and politely exit their adventure. They yelled and shoved and waved signs even though, this time, the police shoved back, resuming a duty that saves lives.

#94 | Posted by phesterOBoyle at 2020-07-11 12:20 PM | Reply

"During the mayhem,"

Brother.

The "mayhem" has never stopped.

#95 | Posted by donnerboy at 2020-07-11 12:26 PM | Reply

The Supremes have said cities and other cop agencies may discriminate against cops deemed to be too intelligent. Incoming applicants ought to have at least an associate degree, with a preference for a bachelor degree. Understanding nuances of criminal and civil law is not for idiots who cannot or will not read and study.

Bad cops have to be cut loose. Bad cops cannot go to another department after they've been fired by a department. We have computers now, so bad cops can be flagged forever wherever they go.

The cop training ought to emphasize de-escalation instead of control. A cop going into a situation already in full rage will only get the police agency sued. Self-control and self-discipline can be taught to a K-9, so training cops to control themselves ought to be doable. Cops who "lose it" when dealing with civilians are a lawsuit waiting to happen.

#96 | Posted by john47 at 2020-07-11 12:33 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Good! That's fewer you have to get rid of once you start downsizing the NYPD.

#97 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2020-07-11 02:34 PM | Reply

Good.

#98 | Posted by fresno500 at 2020-07-12 01:55 AM | Reply

The Supremes have said cities and other cop agencies may discriminate against cops deemed to be too intelligent. Incoming applicants ought to have at least an associate degree, with a preference for a bachelor degree.

#96 | POSTED BY JOHN47 AT 2020-07-11 12:33 PM | FLAG:

This is institutional racism in a nutshell and why police are rarely from low income neighborhoods they have to police.

#99 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-07-12 09:50 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort