Law and Order in America

[cybercoma]

With no chance of parole?

Most likely. Paul Bernardo and other infamous killers in Canada are never getting out.

[guyser]

Castro got what....little more than a 1 year sentence for each crime?

Tsk Tsk

[Guest American Woman]

Whats the diff if he got 40 years? Pure optics

He'll still be dead before any of that is up

One of the purposes of a sentence such as his - life + 1000 years without parole to be served consecutively - is to make the possibility of parole effectively non-existent. Ever. While Bernardo, for example, comes up for parole in 2020. Edited August 1, 2013 by American Woman

[guyser]

One of the purposes of a sentence such as his - life + 1000 years to be served consecutively - is to make the possibility of parole effectively non-existent.

I get that but considering he is 53 he really wasnt about to go anywhere. I have no problem with whats been handed down, but even one count of life doomed him . The rest is overkill and maybe that helps the girls who were impacted, if so great. Glad they did it.

[Guest American Woman]

I get that but considering he is 53 he really wasnt about to go anywhere. I have no problem with whats been handed down, but even one count of life doomed him . The rest is overkill and maybe that helps the girls who were impacted, if so great. Glad they did it.

Like I said in my edit, Bernardo comes up for parole in 2020. I think it's to make sure that never happens. It does help the victims, I'm sure, knowing that there's no chance of parole, or even having to know that he's putting in for parole. Bernardo is saying how reformed he is and thus a good candidate for parole; I would think Castro's sentence prevents even that type of scenario, which has to be rough on victims.

[guyser]

Like I said in my edit, Bernardo comes up for parole in 2020. I think it's to make sure that never happens. Bernardo is saying how reformed he is and thus a good candidate for parole; I would think Castro's sentence prevents even that type of scenario, which has to be rough on victims.

Bernardo can say what ever he wants, and yes by all accounts (not Bernardos) from prison officials he has been a good boy for the time he has served.

He has 2 life sentences, so he will always be under the thumb of CSC , but he is also classified as a dangerous offender which means he likely wont go anywhere for quite some time...if ever.

He is stuck in a cell 23 hours a day, 1 hour to watch tv or clean up. Hope he likes it. He cant see anyone, nor can anyone see him while in the cell.

[Guest American Woman]

....he is also classified as a dangerous offender which means he likely wont go anywhere for quite some time...if ever.

"He likely won't go anywhere" and "he won't ever be able to have that opportunity" are two very different things, and as I said, the victims are subjected to parole hearings and the possibility of parole, regardless of how slim.

He is stuck in a cell 23 hours a day, 1 hour to watch tv or clean up. Hope he likes it. He cant see anyone, nor can anyone see him while in the cell.

That's good, but I don't think he should even have the possibility of parole; he should never even be up for parole. In the Charles Manson family parole hearings, for example, the victims' relatives feel compelled to speak out against their parole. If parole were not even a possibility, they would have been able to let it all go a long time ago, knowing the guilty parties would never be up for release. There are times when parole shouldn't even be a slim, unlikely possibility - and I think that reasoning is behind Castro's sentence.

[kimmy]

Teen stopped for traffic infraction; while one officer deals with the teen, his partner covertly pepper-sprays the kid's pizza.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/nation_world/Prosecutors_Deputy_pepper-sprayed_teens_pizza.html

What an asshole.

-k

[GostHacked]

Cops beating up a person in a wheelchair at the police station.

If they treat the disabled like this, guess how they are going to treat an able bodied person?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7IHJYwWwwY

[kimmy]

It's no secret that the state of Texas wants to get its business in your business, as Rick Perry's mandatory trans-vaginal ultrasound law demonstrated. And now, Texas State Troopers are getting in on the action too.

As if it isn't disgusting enough that this happened at all, it's made even more repulsive by the officer going anus first then vagina, without changing gloves.

Not the first of its kind, either.

Texas officials say the searches are unconstitutional. So do attorneys for the shaken women, who have filed federal lawsuits.

But lawyers and civil rights advocates tell the Daily News these cavity searches are really standard policy among the Texas Department of Public Safety’s state troopers, despite their illegality — not to mention that they were conducted on the side of the road in full view of passing motorists.

“It’s ridiculous,” said Dallas attorney Peter Schulte, a former Texas cop and prosecutor. “We would never put our hands anywhere near someone’s private parts,” he said of his time as a police officer in the city of McKinney. “When I saw that video I was shocked. I was a law enforcement officer for 16 years and I’ve never seen anything like it.”

Department of Public Safety Director Steven McCraw, who oversees state troopers, denied an interview request from The News. In an earlier statements about the videotaped traffic stops, McCraw said his department “does not and will not tolerate any conduct that violates the U.S. and Texas constitutions, or DPS training or policy.”

So how did Texas troopers hundreds of miles apart get captured on dash cams conducting body cavity searches under nearly identical conditions?

“The fact that they both happened means there is some sort of (department) policy” advocating their use at traffic stops, Jim Harrington of the Texas Civil Rights Project told the Daily News. “It’s such a prohibited practice. I don’t know why they think they can do this. It’s mind-boggling.”

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/troopers-texas-probe-genitals-women-traffic-stops-article-1.1414668

Pigs.

-k

[cybercoma]

Seriously!?

[GostHacked]

Seriously!?

It's more than just a few bad apples. All in the name of freedom and justice.

Are we getting the picture yet?

[cybercoma]

There's no out-of-context whatsoever in some of these videos. It doesn't matter the context. There's way too many terrible cops. This is insane.

[GostHacked]

There's no out-of-context whatsoever in some of these videos. It doesn't matter the context. There's way too many terrible cops. This is insane.

It gets quite obvious after a while and can no longer be ignored or brushed off as an isolated incident. And you are right, context is everything, but even the most staunch apologetics cannot defend against these kinds of police actions. Meaning the video provides all the context you need.

But this is not just in the USA, this is happening all over the world.

If it disgusts you, and it should, then you at least have some sense of humanity.

Edited August 5, 2013 by GostHacked

[ReeferMadness]

Revolting. Police just have way too much power.

[kimmy]

Seriously!?

What struck me about these particular incidents is that these *aren't* rogue cops trying to get away with something.

Notice how the guy calls in a female officer to administer the cavity search? Notice how they make sure everything happens in view of the dash camera? Those aren't the actions of rogue cops trying to get away with something. Those are the actions of cops following a procedure. It's not a "one bad apple" type problem, it's a "the whole institution is messed up" type problem.

-k

[cybercoma]

What struck me about these particular incidents is that these *aren't* rogue cops trying to get away with something.Notice how the guy calls in a female officer to administer the cavity search? Notice how they make sure everything happens in view of the dash camera? Those aren't the actions of rogue cops trying to get away with something. Those are the actions of cops following a procedure. It's not a "one bad apple" type problem, it's a "the whole institution is messed up" type problem.-k

yeah, but Canada!

[guyser]

Teen stopped for traffic infraction; while one officer deals with the teen, his partner covertly pepper-sprays the kid's pizza.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/nation_world/Prosecutors_Deputy_pepper-sprayed_teens_pizza.html

What an asshole.

-k

NO doubt.

What I find worse, had the kid done that to the cop, felony assault charge coming his way. Funny huh...?....for the cop to do this, he gets misdemeanor charge.

Perpetuates the idea there are laws for us, laws for cops.

[carepov]

With all these examples there is clearly a problem. Do you think that the problem is getting worse or is it just more visible now compared to the past?

[GostHacked]

carepov, on 06 Aug 2013 - 11:48 AM, said:

With all these examples there is clearly a problem. Do you think that the problem is getting worse or is it just more visible now compared to the past?

Good question. Part of it may be it has always been this bad, but now with cameras everywhere, there is more accountability and the police can no longer hide behind the badge and protect their bad apples. The corruption is being exposed more, mainly due to the technology and Internet. Also to note that many of these situations the police were busted by their own dash cams. Opps forgot to delete that one.

[cybercoma]

With all these examples there is clearly a problem. Do you think that the problem is getting worse or is it just more visible now compared to the past?

I think it's probably a little bit of both. Police don't seem to have a sense that they serve their communities any more. The mindset is now about militant enforcement, as opposed to service. Cops used to have relationships with the people in their community. They were like the letter carriers or going back further the person that delivers the milk. At least that was the stereotype. I'm sure there has always been bad cops, but "beats" were a different thing back then. The second part of the issue is that video cameras and the mobile phone revolution has made it infinitely easier for people to communicate with everyone in the world instantly, as well as publishing photos and videos of things as they happen. Even 10 years ago, this practice wasn't even remotely as widespread as it is now. So obviously the police actions are more visible these days. A third issue is the militarization of policing. I can't remember the name of the police chief that said it, but he was against having a SWAT team in his city because, as he said, "communities that get SWAT teams need to use those SWAT teams to justify their funding and existence." Crime is at the lowest it has been in a generation, but you will never hear of police services rolling back the militarized technologies and tactics and systems that they use today. How did cops deal with people before they had tasters, for example? They were required to negotiate and have good persuasion skills to deal with situations. Instead of continuing to rely on those skills, they jump to the tools right away because they have them. The tools are the quick and easy solution, instead of actually having to be skilled at dealing with people. But the key to this third point that I'm laboriously trying to make is that regardless of crime going down, when police have these tools they're going to use them when they don't necessarily need to.

[cybercoma]

I just want to clarify one thing. Don't read what I wrote above and think that I believe cops were just friendly neighbourhood chaps, smiling and helpful. The corrupt cop trope has been around for as long as there has been police. So they certainly existed and it's quite possible that it's to the same extent as today.

A fourth point to consider. What seems to be falling apart today is the sense of spatially local community, not just with police, but amongst everyone. When that sense of community dies, then police are just a symptom of a larger problem. If there's no community for them to respect because we no longer see ourselves as local communities (most people find like-minded people around the world through the web nowadays), then it's hardly any surprise that we don't see them having the mindset that they should have a sense of duty and service to their community. Their community is other officers and likeminded people that they make connections with across space and time through the internet now, as opposed to the people in the neighbourhoods where they work. Those people in the neighbourhood barely see themselves as a community any more, so police can no longer be a part of a community that no longer exists.

Edited August 6, 2013 by cybercoma

[carepov]

Police don't seem to have a sense that they serve their communities any more. The mindset is now about militant enforcement, as opposed to service.

I disagree, but how would either of us be able to support our opinions with data?

A third issue is the militarization of policing. I can't remember the name of the police chief that said it, but he was against having a SWAT team in his city because, as he said, "communities that get SWAT teams need to use those SWAT teams to justify their funding and existence."

Well, at least one police cheif seems to be against excessive capabilities. I don't see the link however between militarization and abuse of power or police misconduct. If anything, if the police were more like the armed forces conduct and discipline should improve.

Crime is at the lowest it has been in a generation, but you will never hear of police services rolling back the militarized technologies and tactics and systems that they use today. How did cops deal with people before they had tasters, for example? They were required to negotiate and have good persuasion skills to deal with situations. Instead of continuing to rely on those skills, they jump to the tools right away because they have them. The tools are the quick and easy solution, instead of actually having to be skilled at dealing with people. But the key to this third point that I'm laboriously trying to make is that regardless of crime going down, when police have these tools they're going to use them when they don't necessarily need to.

Yes crime is at its lowest - police deserve some credit for that, don't you think?

Before tasters I guess cops used smellers... Seriously, I think that before tasers the cops just used guns.

A fourth point to consider. What seems to be falling apart today is the sense of spatially local community, not just with police, but amongst everyone. When that sense of community dies, then police are just a symptom of a larger problem. If there's no community for them to respect because we no longer see ourselves as local communities (most people find like-minded people around the world through the web nowadays), then it's hardly any surprise that we don't see them having the mindset that they should have a sense of duty and service to their community. Their community is other officers and likeminded people that they make connections with across space and time through the internet now, as opposed to the people in the neighbourhoods where they work. Those people in the neighbourhood barely see themselves as a community any more, so police can no longer be a part of a community that no longer exists.

hmmmm... maybe, yet the fact that crime is at a 40 year low seems to counter this idea.

***

Here is data from the UK:

http://iapdeathsincustody.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Appendix-1-Police-deaths-2000-to-2010.pdf

It looks like fewer people are dying while in police custody (19 people in 2010).

Here is some data from the US:

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ard0309st.pdf

On page 4, there is a steady increase in deaths from 376 in 2003 to 497 in 2009. This seems very high compared to the UK. It would be interesting to know what percentage of these killings were "justified".

On the other hand, police officers are also getting killed, about 150 per year in the US.

http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/year.html

Is the increase of death by police in the US due to the police (abuse of power, misconduct, etc) or is it due to the perpetrators (increased gun ownership)?

I couldn't find any trends is police brutality (reports of abuse per year, charges/convictions of police officers per year, etc...) Yes we have plenty of recent videos of police brutality but unless I see concrete data, I am going to assume that these videos are available now because of the available technology, not an increase in police brutality. I am all for these videos and an increase in accountability, I think that police brutality will continue to decline because officers know they are being watched.

[dre]

I just want to clarify one thing. Don't read what I wrote above and think that I believe cops were just friendly neighbourhood chaps, smiling and helpful.

I think that contempt for citizens trickles down from the top of government into its various agencies.

They dont seem to like us very much.

[jacee]

I think that contempt for citizens trickles down from the top of government into its various agencies.

They dont seem to like us very much.

I agree.

Crime rates are down.

Deaths of police officers are way down.

But police are killing more people.

Not because they have more to fear.

Not because they have more to do.

Why?

We have a cop who has killed 3 people. With collusion of other officers, he's been cleared every time.

Seems cops are more likely to stand up for a dangerous colleague than they are to stand up for the community or the integrity of their profession. That has implications.

I've watched a beat cop deal with a varied community with compassion and most importantly, knowledge of the community: He knows who's potential trouble and who's not. I've seen other squads of officers come in the neighbourhood during special events, and try to goad people into misbehaving. It's like they try to create a problem to justify their presence.

I think it's a good idea when one sees cops misbehaving to remind them who pays their salary.

It was clear at the G20 that cops weren't there to protect the constitutional democratic rights of citizens to be on the street or protest. And yet that IS their first responsibility.

They have become tools of the state to oppress people's rights and impose government agendas.

And it shows in their increasing violence against citizens.