The Sacramento Bee https://www.facebook.com/share/bndN19oNXQb2ecPG/?mibextid=LQQJ4d
the problem is police are not held accountable for their ignorance of the laws they are hired to enforce.
they need to be prosecuted for their ignorance. dont like it? dont be a police officer.
I don’t know if this is ignorance, it could just be a lie so they don’t have to face more scrutiny.
ive worked in healthcare, where even some of the lower roles require periodic (regulation required) training. ignorance is no excuse in healthcare.
ive also worked in police departments where ignorance is just a tool in their box, because they are not actually required to know anything.
best case, police should have a 4 year degree in law enforcement to even be considered to hold a human-killing device.
worst case; police should be periodically challenged on their knowledge of the law, just like every other role with elevated responsibility.
I don’t disagree, but considering how averse the police are to being filmed, I’m willing to bet they just don’t want to be filmed, despite their ignorance on the law.
In fact, I think a cop saying things like “It’s illegal to film cops” or “It’s illegal to film an ongoing arrest” or “It’s illegal to film a crime scene” cannot be viewed through the lens of ignorance. If you know little about the law you might misinterpret the law, or not know specific laws exist, or not know legal processes. But they aren’t “not knowing” the law, they are inventing a new law that doesn’t exist. They are inventing a new law that benefits them, and then using their authority, perceived knowledge of the law, and threat of force and violence to get their way.
If anything, cops hate accountability. And cameras are good at holding them accountable. And even if what they are doing is legal (such as clearing an unhoused camp), the public outcry will not be super pleasant for them. I remember the anger cops had when my state made them wear body cams, and I remember early scandals about cops disabling the cameras before doing horrible shit.
I’m willing to bet they just don’t want to be filmed, despite their ignorance on the law.
THEY DON’T WANT EVIDENCE OF THEIR CRIMES.
It’s really that simple.
Feigned ignorance still counts
Molotovs through the station windows are an acceptable substitute.
I mean, technically it is a crime scene after scotus cleared the way to make existence a crime. That doesn’t make it right.
Copypasta from a first-level reply because it’s relevant here:
I mean, technically it is a crime scene after scotus cleared the way to make existence a crime. That doesn’t make it right.
ACAB
Yup they just don’t want to be on video destroying people’s lives. They know this is wrong. They feel shame, but they’re doing it anyways. So the last thing they want is video evidence they were ever this cruel.
They absolutely do not feel shame. They just don’t want to be caught
Why would they care if it weren’t for shame?
Consequences. Because once you understand that for profit housing is the root cause of homelessness and not some vague unwillingness to live indoors then homeless people are victims not criminals. And if we ever get this country to actually be worker centric instead of owner centric we’re going to look at those videos and identify the people willing to punch down on victims. They don’t want that, and they especially don’t want people seeing them haul senior citizens off to prison because they didn’t comply with the destruction of everything that won’t fit into a duffel bag.
What consequences are there really for officers from the USA?
Social pressure if ‘normal’ people they know see the video.
None right now. They’re worried about the future.
Blue lives don’t matter. ACAB
The personality disorder that leads people to be cops ought to be a disqualifying trait. I don’t really know how we would get appropriate people. The job itself probably creates some of the personality disorder- repeatedly seeing horrible crime scenes is probably traumatic and encountering awful people might create prejudices. It’s also bad that some departments disqualify candidates if their IQ is too high.
A partial solution is quite simple: Separate violent crime police from administrative police. This is actually the point of police defunding. You don’t need to SWAT unit, or even a firearm to respond to traffic violations, noise complaints, loitering, or domestic abuse.
Actually on the last point many times you do need a firearm or other options during domestic abuse calls.
You seem to think there is any will to change anything. There isn’t, the system is already working exactly as intended.
i don’t know the context of this post but i find the headline to be insulting and the comparison within unacceptable.
dogs are loyal and innocent creatures. they are famously the species with which ours has bonded closest. why denigrate them woth parallels to pigs such as police officers?
Pigs are also a bad comparison. The only acceptable comparison is Bulls. Stupid, Impulsive and irrationally angry
Bulls never shot up the neighborhood because an acorn fell
You might be expecting too much from an animal snarlword
We all know they would if they had the thumbs for it. Fuck bulls.
Chimps might be close. Violent, impulsive, monsters prone to rape and ruining the lives of those they hate while being fiercely loyal to their tribe. Unfortunately it has a negative racial connotation and they’re a bit too smart to be compared with cops.
You’d be impulsive and irrationally angry too if someone kept poking you with swords, and taunting you by waving a cape at you.
I think bulls are notoriously ornery even in the wild
Lol, You’d be angry too if somebody kept poking you with FOIA requests and taunting you with videos of your own actions
I’d probably be (rightfully) fired or in jail if people needed to poke me with FOIA requests and were taunting me for the way I did my job.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Let’s be real. They’re humans. No non-human animal is this disgusting. It’s a speciesist distraction from the real evil.
I mean, technically it is a crime scene after scotus cleared the way to make existence a crime. That doesn’t make it right.
You’re assuming that there was already a criminal statute in place.
I’m pretty sure just about all cities and towns have laws criminalizing loitering and trespass so I would consider that accurate.
An unjust law is no law at all.
How are these sweeps allowed if there are no laws on the books not allowing the public camping?
Because cops don’t actually have to know the law, they can enforce what they believe the law to be.
The Governor of California, Gavin Newsom, is evicting any homeless on state land and heavily pressuring the cities to evict anyone on city land. He’s threatening their state funding if they don’t do it.
There aren’t enough shelter beds though. This is possible because of trespassing laws and the recent SCOTUS decision wiping out a lower court order saying they needed more beds before they could do it.
We’re going to have concentration camps in this country and it will be the homeless. That way we can keep blaming them for capitalism exploiting them right out of their homes. While we force them to work.
seriously. Are shelter beds more expensive than prison beds? This makes no sense.
Less profitable. Which is what conservatives are trying to change by stigmatizing the homeless. Force them into shelters, force them into jobs. Anyone who resists goes into the prison system.
Here is a link to a real article and not just the FB page for The Bee:
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/police-blocked-journalists-getting-close-120000560.html
The article keeps saying they “might” have broke state law but leaves out that whole First Amendment.
I find this insulting to dogs, who are by and large loyal companions who act in their humans’ best interests. Not so for pigs.
Agreed about dogs. But I find this insulting to pigs who are friendly, intelligent and highly social.
ACAB
Fuck cops, fuck policing, fuck the government, the state, and fuck the supreme court.
Remember, these cops are the “good apples” since they are just upholding the law or whatever.
*Bastards.
Dogs don’t deserve that slander.
Honestly, neither do kids born of single moms with no father present
Touche
It could be against municipal code to be camping in the same spot for longer than three days or something, so campers are violating the law, hence the crime scene designation. Just a guess.
