Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!   (85,321 visits to this link)

    2. News

    1. GTA Online

      1. Find Lobbies & Players
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Vehicles
      4. Content Creator
      5. Help & Support
    2. Crews

      1. Events
      2. Recruitment
    1. Grand Theft Auto Series

    2. GTA Next

    3. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    4. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA Mods
    5. GTA Chinatown Wars

    6. GTA Vice City Stories

    7. GTA Liberty City Stories

    8. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    9. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    10. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    11. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    12. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

    2. Red Dead Redemption

    3. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. Forum Support

    2. Site Suggestions

Crazyeighties

Controversial Coppers: Shootings, the racist argument, and the effects

Recommended Posts

Eutyphro

Jesus, that's f*cking horrible. Why did they make him crawl towards them with confusing instructions, and why do they have such incredibly heavy weaponry? They could've just walked up to him and cuffed him. That's just f*cking stupid really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saggy

Jesus, that's f*cking horrible. Why did they make him crawl towards them with confusing instructions, and why do they have such incredibly heavy weaponry? They could've just walked up to him and cuffed him. That's just f*cking stupid really.

 

Because they're conditioned to believe that every person is some kind of unsuspecting Rambo that's going to jump up and kill them with stunning martial arts skills set off by their PTSD. Add to that our sh*tty f*cking gun controls, it only makes them right about that every once in a while. Once bit, twice shy.

 

They show them training videos of police calls where some suspect has killed a responding officer who wasn't being 100% absolutely vigilant, and then stress that if they're not 100% absolutely vigilant all the time, then they're going to leave their wives widowed and their kids bastards. It's kind of like the same way police-apologists try to convince us that these types of incidents happen so rarely, except they completely dismiss how rare those incidents actually are. So rare that there's only a handful of videos that they're commonly shown. Here's a couple...

 

This is probably the oldest and most well-known. Literally hundreds of thousands of cops have been conditioned to fear civilians based on this video. They even condition civilians to sympathize with the officer by playing this on Fox shows like "World's Deadliest Police Shootouts" with John Walsh pontificating about the awful dangers they face every second.

 

 

 

Here is a more modern example thanks to body cams, and there's plenty of fear mongering videos like this to go around YouTube

 

 

 

So basically, they're conditioned to think that every person they encounter could be a blood-thirsty killer a split second away from killing them, because it has happened like that, but they completely ignore the actual frequency of these instances and end up preemptively shooting, and killing, civilians and then try to assuage the civillian's worries by how rare it is, conditioning them to believe its necessary as well.

 

Here go look at the actual comments on this video:

 

"When police give the ppl chance and don't start shooting first"

 

So yeah that should answer your question. Not that it's a reasonable answer. Might explain why so many Americans are pissed off about it too.

 

Oh, forgot the racial element... Don't think there aren't a lot of "John Smiths" on police forces.

 

HzEsI1V.png

 

Here watch this one for a good example of what I mean. Watch how quickly it escalates. This cop has probably seen too many of the videos I already posted. The guy won't even take his hands out of his pocket, he's sitting there filming the cop, and so that raises the idea in the cop's head the man might be armed and going to shoot him, so he pulls his own gun.

 

 

Edited by Saggy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Darth Yokel

I hope the above dimwit reads this:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-daniel-shaver-police-video-20171208-story.html

 

Philip 'Mitch' Brailsford has been acquitted in the shooting of an unarmed, complying suspect, caught on video.

mesa25n-3-web.jpg

 

Brailsford said in court: “If this situation happened exactly as it did that time, I would have done the same thing"

How the f*ck was he not convicted of murder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Raavi

Philip 'Mitch' Brailsford has been acquitted in the shooting of an unarmed, complying suspect, caught on video.

 

This is not just murder beyond reasonable doubt, this is murder beyond any doubt. The whole deliberately confusing ritual he made the guy go through had all appearances of being nothing more than a pretence to shoot the guy when he messed up a move. The guy was ready to be taken into custody when he lay there with his ankles crossed and hands on his head. Everything that happened after was seemingly purely for the sadistic gratification of the killer. This is a gross and glaring miscarriage of justice. How a jury could acquit this murderer and still look at themselves in the mirror is beyond me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eutyphro

We can blame the individual, but to me the core problem seems the code of conduct and instructions they receive, apart from the bizarre overpowered machine gun he was weilding. Everything about what he was doing was completely stupid, and I think most of that can be blamed on policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Darth Yokel

We can blame the individual, but to me the core problem seems the code of conduct and instructions they receive, apart from the bizarre overpowered machine gun he was weilding. Everything about what he was doing was completely stupid, and I think most of that can be blamed on policy.

Not in this case. It was fairly obvious that he was looking for an excuse to kill the guy. We might be dealing with a psychopath here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eutyphro

 

We can blame the individual, but to me the core problem seems the code of conduct and instructions they receive, apart from the bizarre overpowered machine gun he was weilding. Everything about what he was doing was completely stupid, and I think most of that can be blamed on policy.

Not in this case. It was fairly obvious that he was looking for an excuse to kill the guy. We might be dealing with a psychopath here.

It's right to punish this guy harshly, but ultimately it won't solve anything if more cops are trained in a similar manner, and sent out with similar instructions. The same thing will reoccur if nothing changes fundamentally. It's likely that the blame for this occurrence is far more systemic than this one incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saggy

 

We can blame the individual, but to me the core problem seems the code of conduct and instructions they receive, apart from the bizarre overpowered machine gun he was weilding. Everything about what he was doing was completely stupid, and I think most of that can be blamed on policy.

Not in this case. It was fairly obvious that he was looking for an excuse to kill the guy. We might be dealing with a psychopath here.

 

 

Nah, he seems totally level-headed... Note the inscription ( by the yellow tag )

c04060f401.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Darth Yokel

It's right to punish this guy harshly, but ultimately it won't solve anything if more cops are trained in a similar manner, and sent out with similar instructions. The same thing will reoccur if nothing changes fundamentally. It's likely that the blame for this occurrence is far more systemic than this one incident.

I'm aware that their training is a mess and that their standards for competence is basically zero. Check out my previous posts in this topic. I basically hate most cops. But I'm saying that in this particular case I don't think that training would have helped. This guy wanted to kill someone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blaze

I have a question that I guess would be more of a discussion point really; I know a few here are very ACAB f*ck cops abolish authority etc and to a certain extent I'd probably agree however let's say in a hypothetical way cops no longer exist. Who "upholds" (using that term very loosely) law, or is that scrapped too? A lawless, unpoliced society might be a dream for some but with that basic instinct for superiority/survival of the fittest and all that, how would we prevent a lawless unpoliced society from descending into a complete unmoralized human destruction derby? I guess the question is more what would you ACAB advocates believe is a better system?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tchuck

I don't think anyone here is advocating for abolishing the laws. We are against cops in the form that they exist. They don't exist to uphold laws; they exist to keep the status quo and defend the private property of the elites. Your house was burglarized, what can a cop do? Uphold the law? No, f*ck all. Fill out some forms, and that's that. There's been a murder. What can a cop do? f*ck all. They'll take witness accounts, close off the scene, and then detectives and people with actual usable skills take over. If cops are phased out, laws would still exist, prosecution would still exist, detectives would still exist, trials would still exist. Perhaps replace cops with neighbourhood watch; people who actually live in the region and care for their neighbourhood, to keep a watch on things, as opposed to cops who are assigned areas to fill out quotas.

 

The root of the more violent crimes is in society being sh*t thanks to capitalism and inequality. Whenever a society is more equal, crime rates are also lower. Cops don't do much here in Japan, there's rarely any crime they can actually address. If the cops were extinguished tomorrow, most Japanese wouldn't notice, and things would remain the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saggy

I have a question that I guess would be more of a discussion point really; I know a few here are very ACAB f*ck cops abolish authority etc and to a certain extent I'd probably agree however let's say in a hypothetical way cops no longer exist. Who "upholds" (using that term very loosely) law, or is that scrapped too? A lawless, unpoliced society might be a dream for some but with that basic instinct for superiority/survival of the fittest and all that, how would we prevent a lawless unpoliced society from descending into a complete unmoralized human destruction derby? I guess the question is more what would you ACAB advocates believe is a better system?

 

Well, the idea of a lawless society in general is probably very unlikely. Striving for social order, most cultures will invariably appoint members to be part of some form of authority to either protect against dangers, enforce rules or punish wrong-doers that have broken established rules. The different ways this is manifested can be from a loose-fitted, disorganized structure where you could even suggest that some gang members are essentially the "law" if you think about places where they've taken over, and despite the traditional government calling those people "criminals", the "laws" that they tend to enforce will generally mirror the same ones any society would. Theft, rape, murder, arson, etc. are bad for a communal living situation, so communal living dictates these be discouraged and deterred. In the end, even when you consider such "outlaw" type of communities, there is a general order that's still enforced, so the idea that a "lawless" society would just devolve into mass raping and rampant chaos is a little far-out there. Granted, that isn't to say that such loosely-structured forms of "law enforcement" are particularly effective at discouraging crime, so the incidences of the most abhorrent types of crimes might be low, but petty crimes would probably be much higher. In other words, if you kill someone even in an outlaw town, you're likely to get killed in retaliation, maybe even mob-justice style, so there won't be much killing; if you just steal something from someone, it's likely nobody else will care but that specific person. I mean, humans are so enamored with structure and hierarchy though, that even in prison they form elaborate social structures, rules, etc. Even people who don't want to follow the law of the government find their own law to follow. The idea that getting rid of police would lead to lawlessness, chaos and disorder is just unfounded. After all, "police" are kind of a modern concept, but throughout history there have been "watchmen", or "guards", and so forth.

 

What I want to know is why do people believe that the current police state represents something that is here to protect and maintain order, beyond simply being told that is what it does. I believe people often think about the romanticized notions of the lawless wild west where some sheriff has to struggle to keep roving gangs of outlaws from coming in and shooting up the town and raping the women folk. In general, those are pretty far fetched notions. However, even today people seem to think that, "Oh, if there aren't police out there patrolling, it would be chaos and everyone would lynch and murder," and they think about things like that "The Purge" movie, or the LA riots after the Rodney King trial. But in all honesty if police forces tomorrow just dropped down to 1 or 2 people, and criminals began running amok, citizens would take matters into their own hands; just like in Korea town after the Rodney King trial, riots were breaking out, and they were camped out on their roofs with shotguns. Things would tend to equalize, so while I'm not saying it would necessarily be better, but when people point t police absence as a source for mayhem and destruction they are not taken into account society's demonstrated ability to function without police. We forgot that police are supposed to be an improvement and are not really a requirement.

 

So going from that idea, do you think society really needs things like police patrols? It's been mentioned in this thread before, but what if they were simply dispatch-only like the fire department or EMTs? Show up when they're called instead of just going around looking for trouble. A lot of people seem to think that this would make a police presence less visible and encourage crime, but I question if there are other ways to deter crime in the same neighborhood that don't result in thousands upon thousands of civil rights violations, perpetuating the prison industry, and creating the potential for shootouts. Police say all the time how dangerous traffic stops are for them: So stop making traffic stops. The truth is police care more about traffic stops not to enforce traffic safety, but in hopes that they get lucky and bust a drug dealer and can take his money through civil forfeiture. In that same vein, that's really what most of the drug war is about, and even when you look at civil infractions and how much revenue they generate the states, it becomes apparent that the current police state is about generating revenue more than it is about maintaining order.

 

I think personally there needs to be some kind of balance and perspective. I mean, if you think about the type of law and order cartels impose in Mexico where they've taken over towns it probably seems outlandish to suggest that it is "good", but if you compare it to more primitive cultures then even then you have a lower rate of murder and death. Most people don't realize that in primitive human culture, homicide was far more prevalent. Things like poverty and resources scarcity effect that type of crime far more than having police around. However, if you then look at our bloated system, it's clear that it's transcended far beyond trying to maintain order and peace and become a system to sustain other interests. In my view there's a middle ground that can be sought, and I believe the current police state has been on the totalitarian-extreme end of that balance at least since the late 19th/early 20th century when they began using police forces to quell "rebellions" and "protests". The current police state is not maintaining order, they're maintaining control.

 

I have no idea what ACAB means, maybe you should spell it out at least once so there's some context. All Cops are "something" I'm guessing. Bacon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Darth Yokel

I have a question that I guess would be more of a discussion point really; I know a few here are very ACAB f*ck cops abolish authority etc and to a certain extent I'd probably agree however let's say in a hypothetical way cops no longer exist. Who "upholds" (using that term very loosely) law, or is that scrapped too? A lawless, unpoliced society might be a dream for some but with that basic instinct for superiority/survival of the fittest and all that, how would we prevent a lawless unpoliced society from descending into a complete unmoralized human destruction derby? I guess the question is more what would you ACAB advocates believe is a better system?

That depends entirely on cops. If they're normal and not just criminals with guns and a license to shoot you then it's all fine. But if they're like this guy: https://www.thedailybeast.com/louisville-area-assistant-police-chief-told-recruit-to-shoot-black-people then they might as well not even exist.

Edited by Darth Yokel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.