Police in the US use force on at least 300,000 people each year, injuring an estimated 100,000 of them, according to a groundbreaking data analysis on law enforcement encounters.

Mapping Police Violence, a non-profit research group that tracks killings by US police, launched a new database on Wednesday cataloging non-fatal incidents of police use of force, including stun guns, chemical sprays, K9 dog attacks, neck restraints, beanbags and baton strikes.

The database features incidents from 2017 through 2022, compiled from public records requests in every state. The findings, the group says, suggest that despite widespread protests against police brutality following the murder of George Floyd in 2020, overall use of force has remained steady since then – and in many jurisdictions, has increased.

  • agamemnonymous
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    My issue with this notion is the implication that the modern world is uniquely tortuous and exploitative. Humans are violent, greedy, opportunistic apex predators. Our nobility and justice are individual and aspirational. The whole point of the complex web is to introduce friction and disincentives to that violence.

    Should we try to minimize that violence? Absolutely! But our institutions are our attempt to crawl out of the jungle. Without police we’d have other violent gangs with even less oversight.

    • Kagu@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I encourage you to read Humankind by Rutger Bregman. The notion that humans are inherently animalistic, greedy, and violent has not been supported by the bulk of anthropological study throughout modern history, and his book does a good job of breaking down why there’s such a divide between the perception of so-called “human nature” and the anthropological and sociological evidence.

      TLDR: humans aren’t inherently greedy, we respond to our systems and environment more than anything.

      • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Thank you for this. I was about to bring up that history is littered with societies who had things pretty well squared away and were doing just fine before the touch of colonialism reached them. Societies that don’t exist anymore because they stood in the way of “progress.” Societies whose people were either enslaved, genocided, or both

        • agamemnonymous
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Maybe relatively small societies, but there has always been violence in any society of consistent size.

      • agamemnonymous
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        That’s a nice thought, and I certainly won’t completely disregard our capacity for, but our extensive history of war and brutality proves that this absolutely universal. I’m not saying that every human is violent, but it’s silly to suggest that there aren’t violent humans at every stage of history.

        • Kagu@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          What your original comment suggested was not that you acknowledged the human capacity for violence, which nobody can deny and I am not debating.

          The comment implied - and this is an assumption so ingrained in our western society that nobody could blame you for it - that the only thing separating humans from violent, animalistic, or selfish impulses is societal structure and policing.

          our institutions are our attempt to crawl out of the jungle

          That just isn’t demonstrable, as much as it may feel intuitive. It’s a Hobbian philosophy.

          I’m not here to pretend I can convince you otherwise in one comment thread, took me a long time to change my mind on that and I’m not anthropological authority. That’s why I recommend the book, it’s quite eye-opening. At least it was for me.

          • agamemnonymous
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Specifically what I said was that individual choice separates humans from violent, animalistic, and selfish impulses. I said that societal structure introduces friction to disincentivize those impulses for those who would submit to them.