THE POLICE PROBLEM
The police problem is that police are policed by the police. Cops are accountable only to other cops, which is no accountability at all.
99.9999% of police brutality, corruption, and misconduct is never investigated, never punished, never makes the news, so it's not on this page.
When cops are caught breaking the law, they're investigated by other cops. Details are kept quiet, the officers' names are withheld from public knowledge, and what info is eventually released is only what police choose to release — often nothing at all.
When police are fired — which is all too rare — they leave with 'law enforcement experience' and can easily find work in another police department nearby. It's called "Wandering Cops."
When police testify under oath, they lie so frequently that cops themselves have a joking term for it: "testilying." Yet it's almost unheard of for police to be punished or prosecuted for perjury.
Cops can and do get away with lawlessness, because cops protect other cops. If they don't, they aren't cops for long.
The legal doctrine of "qualified immunity" renders police officers invulnerable to lawsuits for almost anything they do. In practice, getting past 'qualified immunity' is so unlikely, it makes headlines when it happens.
All this is a path to a police state.
In a free society, police must always be under serious and skeptical public oversight, with non-cops and non-cronies in charge, issuing genuine punishment when warranted.
Police who break the law must be prosecuted like anyone else, promptly fired if guilty, and barred from ever working in law-enforcement again.
That's the solution.
♦ ♦ ♦
Our definition of ‘cops’ is broad, and includes prison guards, probation officers, shitty DAs and judges, etc — anyone who has the authority to fuck over people’s lives, with minimal or no oversight.
♦ ♦ ♦
RULES
① Real-life decorum is expected. Please don't say things only a child or a jackass would say in person.
② If you're here to support the police, you're trolling. Please exercise your right to remain silent.
③ Saying ~~cops~~ ANYONE should be killed lowers the IQ in any conversation. They're about killing people; we're not.
④ Please don't dox or post calls for harassment, vigilantism, tar & feather attacks, etc.
Please also abide by the instance rules.
It you've been banned but don't know why, check the moderator's log. If you feel you didn't deserve it, hey, I'm new at this and maybe you're right. Send a cordial PM, for a second chance.
♦ ♦ ♦
ALLIES
• r/ACAB
♦ ♦ ♦
INFO
• A demonstrator's guide to understanding riot munitions
• Cops aren't supposed to be smart
• Killings by law enforcement in Canada
• Killings by law enforcement in the United Kingdom
• Killings by law enforcement in the United States
• Know your rights: Filming the police
• Three words. 70 cases. The tragic history of 'I can’t breathe' (as of 2020)
• Police aren't primarily about helping you or solving crimes.
• Police lie under oath, a lot
• Police spin: An object lesson in Copspeak
• Police unions and arbitrators keep abusive cops on the street
• Shielded from Justice: Police Brutality and Accountability in the United States
• When the police knock on your door
♦ ♦ ♦
ORGANIZATIONS
• NAACP
• National Police Accountability Project
• Vera: Ending Mass Incarceration
view the rest of the comments
Firebombs and firearms are lethal weapons. There has always been self defense claims available in those situations regardless of their previous statements. If you state "I will shoot anyone who shoots at me" you don't lose your ability to claim self defense.
Police violence is a massive problem in America but the actual statement aligns with literally every single American's right to self defense in those specific situations.
Im not apologizing for fascism and your claim is obviously incorrect.
They didn't say that, though.
Nobody is entitled to kill, even in self defense. If you can avoid killing, and choose not to, that is not self defense.
You are - only - entitled to defend yourself. If you kill an assailant who is an immediate threat to your life because you had no other choice, you have not commited murder. If you subdue the assailant, and then kill them, you have committed murder.
"If you point a gun at us, we will shoot you"
"If you point a gun at us, we will kill you"
Your example does not read the same as this post, which sounds much closer to a threat. Yes, you are defending fascist rhetoric because police officers with power to kill protesters are not like other citizens. This is a disgusting apologia.
Read the last part of the quotes. The sheriff literally states that if you throw a brick, throw a firebomb or point a gun at you then they will kill you.
Im not sure if thrown bricks can kill so I left it out but setting people on fire and guns obviously can and almost certainly meet the rules by which the police can shoot at you (as well as others in CA but Im less certain of that).
Again this isn't apologia. You either have not read the quotes or you aren't thinking that you would have the same rights to self defense in those situations.
It is specific, he's statng something he will look for as an excuse to murder.
Also he is a police officer, not just some dude, so your comparison was bullshit to begin with.
It is the optics really.... It is just a opportunity to intimidate and we know these pigglets have got caught doing shady shit already. They don't keep us safe. This is a violent dog and pony show for the micro penis burger king. The cops esuculate the situation every single time...have you ever been to a protest? Go touch some grass and stop licking boots. Rationalizing the unreasonable is like fucking for virginity. What are you 90 years old...so out of touch. This oinker is rogue and unprofessional if there was ever such a thing attributed to such a lowly creature. You are either a agent or a idiot.
I have been protesting for various causes for decades.
Engaging with police using lethal force is not going to endear anyone to the anti-government cause that desperately needs more people involved.
Your stances are admirable and I understand your sentiment but they are relics of a past you were privileged to live in for those decades (others didn't share that experience and have been going through this without national attention). Your reality has now shifted and I hope that you'll be able to come to terms with those changes and not regress into authoritarian sympathies like your relatives thinking "if only they could do it peacefully".
Enough people have pointed out the flaw in the "self-defense" scenarios you're imagining, I don't believe you will come around to those without heavy education/exposure on past & current events involving police interaction and constitutional rights (there are a lot of good resources and public "auditors" online you should seek out). I will just point out the slippery slope that exists with the Sheriffs statements, "What is a brick?" - at what point does a brick become a rock/pebble or vice versa? "What is a firebomb?" - if any incendiary device is considered lethal, do firecrackers or sparklers count since it ignites?
An officer in full tactical/riot gear getting hit with a brick isn't lethal, yet a "non-lethal" firearm can kill from a shot in the face or beanbag to the chest in close range. Teargas can cause a fatal reaction if not treated in time. The "law-enforcement" in this instance have decided due-process (once again) isn't necessary and will pass judgement on your actions while punishing you with state-sponsored violence and/or death.
The lines have already been drawn, "People that want to protest will be met with big force... this is people that hate our country. They will be met with heavy force." -Trump
People have already decided on their stance, the various and numerous polls show basically the same support that Trump was elected with. Their goal is to silence the 30-50% that heavily oppose and demonize them in the eye of public opinion. It's an effective campaign. Trump supporters who still follow want the chaos and clap-down of rights to "protect them" from their perceived threats. The neutral parties just want to be left alone in their comfort and don't want to be imposed upon (these are the same neutral parties like in Nazi Germany) and will take any excuse to condemn "violent protestors" whether it's factual or actually representative of the movement as a whole. There will be no "reconciliation" or changing of people's minds till the fascists come directly for them and effect negative outcomes in their lives (just like they condemn peaceful protests because they're in a street).