Philosophy Now Forum

I find myself concerned about members of community police forces -- and other police-force units, particularly the special law enforcement units (e.g., ERTs) -- who are gratuitously aggressive with some (usually) male civilians.
The most extreme of the ‘law-enforcers’ storm into crime suspects’ homes, screaming, with fully-automatic machineguns or handguns drawn, at the homes’ occupants (e.g., to “Get down! Face down!”), all of whom, including infants, can be permanently traumatized from the experience. And on some occasions, these ‘law-enforcers’ force their way into the wrong home, altogether!
I’m convinced that many of these (mostly) men get into such fields of employment for the sheer power-trip of it all.

4th amendment and castle law

-Imp

At least, I add my voice to this topic because something is totally out of line! I think this applies to Police around the world and that the world is quite crazy...

I wonder what makes Police so "above" the rest of society beyond their own salary! They have indeed accepted the "package" that comes with police work and they have a duty to comply with job requirements and generally show good behaviour toward society even outside of work! (This used to be an addition to the perpetrator (of former Police force) from the Judge some time ago.)

From their own psychology: it may be useful to see the Police enforcers as "Kings (of metal) of Society"! They are "that good"!

Just a tip: approach the Police with scepticism and and be hard on "routines" and "safety measures" in case something abrupt is to happen. Also, I think it's a duty (to society) to file a complaint if there is such grounding. Stay alert, people!

Thanks for the topic, FrankGSterleJr!

I don't think it applies to every police force equally. Americans do tend to be a bit over-the-top. I think they watch too many Hollywood films. And of course guns being everywhere doesn't help. That said, there is a certain ammount of tension over the use of stop and search powers here in Britain.

Where the hell do you live? Iraq?

These policemen has completely lost the fucking plot. I can't believe what I saw.
Was that blood from his face?

We live in a sick world.

According to Metro Transit Police he "resisted arrest which resulted in him falling out of his wheelchair." See, you thought he was thrown to the ground but obviously he wasn't as they were probably trying to prevent the poor guy hurting himself. He was also apparently arrested for "assault on a police office" (I assume he was a master of some wheelchair bound martial art not obviously apparent to untrained observers like us) and "drinking in public" (hang 'em all).

I found the additional information on NBC Washington

.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPyANnZ5 ... ntrinter=1


On the back of their shirts the word RANGERS appears.


I posted this video originally on the Political Forum.



.

Have they no shame? Just to watch him die, when they could so easily stopped the flow of blood.

We see these huge outpourings here in Australia for soldiers and police killed; official funerals and the like. Instantly a soldier dies in Afghanistan it is headline news... one soldier! and he is a hero and quintessential good guy dying for us all - and don't you think otherwise!

This emphasis on military and law enforcement personnel as our ultimate saviours is symptomatic of regime mentality, symptomatic of countries and states intuiting that self-sufficiency and strong employment is in dark decline. When resources start becoming scarce, invade the troves of others - others are less important. The deeply mortal problem with that in our day is that there are no 'others' anymore. It is one globe, one people: humanity. There are no new continents, peoples or oceans left.

Must we go out as a species in a homicidal mania, in the least worthy fashion we can manage? We have the ability and intelligence for so much better.

Perhaps because the closest I come to utilizing “social media” is the Internet at the local library, I agree with the ivory-tower critiques of the relentless humiliation of the Vancouver (B.C., Canada) Stanley Cup hockey-final rioters by potentially indefinitely posting their mugs up onto the world wide web –- which apparently ‘has no delete button’ –- resulting in not only incredible embarrassment but physical threats. (Furthermore, say the critiques, such a negative experience dished out by the outraged public could easily result in future criminal behaviour by many social-media "shamed" rioters.) The rioters committed a finite crime (i.e., one night of uncontrolled mayhem and destruction) and therefore the penalty levied against them should be comparatively finite. But the fact that right from the very first night I was opposed to “shaming,” does not negate from the fact that most, if not all, of the blame for that consequence of their smashing, burning and looting should be laid at the feet of simple bad luck and/or timing –- a time during which the vast majority of the populace almost always have instant access to video-recording cell phones, etc.
Having said that, though, I strongly disagree with the spreading notion by many news-media, ivory-tower columnists that the very angry public reacted incorrectly following the thoroughly publicized salt-on-the-wound post-Stanley-Cup-loss complete-lawless activity; that the masses were but a mob themselves in their condemnation and immediate, on a very large scale, “shaming” and threatening of the visually recorded rioters.
No matter how hard I try, I cannot picture the Greater Vancouver area masses collectively philosophizing over the entire wild event occurring before their stunned eyes in the same rational manner that some social scientists and noble columnists rather smugly do, with the advantage of clear hindsight. Yes, we, as a whole, could be described as having behaved, and to an extent still behaving, in a societally-unproductive, reactionary manner with our shocked outrage. However, it was nonetheless a reaction that was appropriately normal at such a point in time. Indeed, to expect anything else from an average, normal populace would be irrational.

All aboriginal communities (nations) across the U.S. and Canada deserve at least some say in their ‘law enforcement’—i.e., the traditional healing/sentencing circle.
Aboriginal peoples should be permitted to practice their healing/sentencing circle, for aboriginal-based crimes (i.e., aboriginal perpetrators against aboriginal victims), since our criminal-court system can be unproductive and even destructive.
When I, a white man, stood before a court judge—another man, who, like me, is/was but a human being with his own frailties—I found his elevated position quite intimidating and, at sentencing, frightening. The aboriginal healing/sentencing circle contrarily has all of those people involved with a crime (the offender, the victim and their families, etc.) sitting in a circle and facing one another, without any elevation and, apparently, with equal status. Furthermore, instead of just shipping an offender off to jail where he can be beaten, raped and thus made into an even worse potential, future offender upon his eventual release, the healing/sentencing circle instead strongly compels him to answer directly to those he’s hurt and possibly bring about a healing resolution. He hears and can respond to his victim’s pain, and he may perhaps also express his own painful past which may have corrupted him.
Our current, often-pompous, adversarial justice system could very well learn a positive thing or two from the aboriginal healing/sentencing circle, especially when dealing with accused people who are already enduring a life affected by mental illness and/or substance abuse.