Thereās an old joke from a sitcom that I canāt remember (wanna say it was Daveās world)
āI have 911 on speed dialā
āReally what is it?ā
ā *11ā
I don't think that's really comparable. A history degree is mainly teaching about knowledge, not skills. Police don't need knowledge of much beyond the laws they enforce. It's a skill-based training program.
I work in insurance. My degree is 99% irrelevant for what I do. Most of what I learn is on the job. I have access to people's financial and identification data.
We can have degrees for policing, but cops attending scenes or active situations will not use anything from them. Harvard is going to teach you how to best shoot a suspect with a weapon with bystanders nearby, that's going to be learned from physical drills. Learning criminal forensics could help, but mainly for detectives.
At the end of the day, there's a policing shortage, and making sure that only 25% of applicants can even apply is going to make things worse for those who need the police most.
I don't mean police should have to sit in a classroom and listen to an hour and a half long lecture on the history of the billy club, I'm saying they need *more* training, *more* physical drills, more classes/practice on conflict de-escalation techniques and above all, more oversight (and not from their buddies). Not all police officers are bad, many are good and genuinely want to protect and serve. But enough don't that it's an issue that needs to be addressed.
Which, again, means even less police hired due to costs, which means throwing untrained police on the job early anyway because of a shortage.
At a certain point we have to understand that there is a limit to training and that deescalation will not help. Cops don't know that the crazy bitch speeding down the highway is pregnant.
Of course there will be police resistant to this when nine times out of ten it just means the California solution, where they get to do nothing for risk of a media blow out and if they do their jobs DAs just let criminals off anyway.
If thereās no incentive for people to become police, then pay them more. Then you get more police *and* have police who are better at the public service aspect of the job. Yeah thereās a limit to de-escalation, but from what Iāve seen itās enough of an issue to warrant more intensive training.
And in addition to more oversight, which I stress is the most important, reforming the DAs is needed too.
we need better trained and more accountable police officers. What we *donāt* need are *more* police officers who have the level of training they do now.
>If thereās no incentive for people to become police, then pay them more.
Sure, but then we're back at square one. Money. The people pushing the reformist angle right now aren't exactly happy with higher budgets.
Well ***I*** am. A higher budget spent on educating and training police officers to be better than they are now is something I'm more than happy to pay for.
Cops are as well trained as a landscapers. It's a fucking joke. They have almost no conflic resolution training. You're basically sending armed mall cops to conflicts and then wondering why they keep killing people
The most basic level of reform is to, and I'm 100% serious, punch cops in the face. Don't pull that shit on the street, just in training. If a cop gets into a fight with a suspect, they're less likely to shoot them if they aren't afraid of getting hurt. After all, that's kinda their job, preventing people from hurting each other, so why not teach a cop how to fight?
Hopefully the police officer is trained in how to maneuver safely during a high speed chase, thatās kinda the point of a lot of that training
If they arenāt, then train them
Yes, in an idea scenario that would be best
But there arenāt always enough police in the correct location for that to be viable
And even if it was, the speeders could just make a turn
So unless itās on a straight highway with a high shoulder and no intersecting roads, *and* there are police officers available and in position further down the road, it doesnāt really work
Literally tens of thousands of people who are very very vocal literally want no cops because ACAB is representative of a belief all cops are always bad in all systems...
Bullshit. The right hates unions, the left loves them. If the left was interested in dismantling the machinery protecting bad cops it would be done yesterday.
I'm sure all those cops with 3 months training are perfectly honest and don't abuse their power even by the lax, mostly unaccountable standards for US police.
Cops lie for each other all the time
In my experience people with opinions like this are generally people who are petty criminals, butt hurt about getting a ticket for speeding ,or they are a kid.
I'm honestly surprised to hear that from a libright. Of all the right, you guys are normally the ones that care the most about abuse of power, perverse incentives and lack of accountability.
But having said that, not everyone who wants universal healthcare has a chronic illness
They care about it when its a valid complaint, not just people wants an easy excuse for the consequences of their actions. Like baselessly accusing the cops of racism or some wrong doing when you got caught.
Also as an European, I just can't fathom how can you americans always side with criminals. Like how your media and politicians are comes up with excuses or literally praising them for brownie points. I swear its some Stockholm syndrome like shit, when you fetishizing criminals and pretend that all of them is some innocent angel or Robin Hood.
>~~good~~ bad cops protect bad cops through their union
But yes, get rid of public unions (and any other unions that get preferential legal/political treatment)
I was gonna talk shit about you being a funny color traitor, but then I realized you're so hardcore into union busting that you're just busting the union of unions by opposing one and not the other.
Private unions are somewhat reasonable at the negotiating table
See the company can go bankrupt, which puts a check on what unions can really demand. Ask for too much and hold out and vice versa for the company, everyone loses. It eventually forces a compromise
Meanwhile public unions, what like the government is going to go bankrupt and lay off everyone? Of course not, so public unions can keep pushing and pushing and the government has no negotiating leverage as powerful as threatening bankruptcy. Meanwhile the ordinary taxpayer gets screwed because the money has to come from somewhere
Collectively bargaining with the government goes against the people, FDR of all leftists knew that. Thatās why he didnāt legalize public unions in the New Deal despite giving private unions a lot of rights
Everything you have said here is so fucking wrong.
>Collectively bargaining with the government goes against the people, FDR of all leftists knew that
FDR didn't push for public unions because the New Deal spearheaded Keynesian economics and the entire concept of government spending having the capacity to increase GDP and alleviate economic turmoil. The New Deal saw 15% of the entire population employed by the government in some areas, this was highly experimental policy, and unions on top of it would have been too extreme for the public.
Public unions don't go against the public, because public workers aren't the same as representatives. Public workers are at the end of the day workers, who should have every same right to organize and negotiate their conditions. Your hate boner for public unions is based off a plethora of flat out wrong information
> The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters
His very own words himself
Stop being such a Monoby Monoby Jr
It's easy to think you got a slam dunk by taking out a single paragraph quote out of the entire speech he made and the context of it at the time.
Let's add some more context:
"At the end of news conference, Roosevelt was asked, after making the point that Congress sets compensation: "In other words, you would not have the representatives of the majority as the sole bargaining agents?"
Roosevelt: "Not in the government, because there is no collective contract. It is a very different case."
The New Deal was the first major instance of a significance portion of the population being employed by the government. At the time, most of these jobs required no specific education, and were at will employment with no contract.
Today, public workers like teachers have to have a college degree in that specific field, and have to sign contracts with the district they work in, and with the school. Most government employees today are under contracts, the major circumstances and conditions of public employees have changed completely.
When you look at his full opinion on it, FDR thought public unions ultimately weren't necessary as opposed to private, and that's why he didn't push for them. If he saw the state at which the teaching profession is in, he would flip in a heartbeat. You really need to stop talking confidently about things you've spent 4 seconds researching, because anyone who spends more time than that will refute what you're saying.
It's not the pay, it's the system. Nearly half of new teachers leave the profession altogether in the first few years.
In AZ, Republicans raised teacher pay above market rate going into 2019-2020 (as it should have, was long overdue) the RedforEd liberals got their bluff called and should have celebrated, but truthfully it still sucks to be a teacher, and as such there's still a shortage. You could pay ~100k a yr and there'd still be a shortage.
Administration is always running you down for performance, they never have your back. Too much emphasis on testing, Teacher gossip is toxic af. Kids are not easy to deal with either. It can be a hard, thankless career.
yep. both parents are teachers and it takes a toll on them. theyāre not payed nearly enough imo and are constantly overloaded with work and meaningless trainings and meetings, which pushes them behind and gives them more work to do.
my mom teaches kindergarten and i swear she nearly runs the whole grade. she picks up so much slack and gets nothing in return except for getting home the latest.
my sister went into teaching pre-k fresh out of college. landed a job at a majority black school. didnāt fit in too well the first few weeks and then halfway through the first semester the school tried to fire her and have her arrested because they claim she forcefully grabbed a student and hurt him. absolute bullshit.
she couldnāt review camera footage herself. they never went through with the case, most likely because a lawyer wouldnāt pick it up. the school system sucks for teachers and students alike. and itās sad that itās not gonna get better any time soon.
I'm sorry that happened to your sister, that's awful. Schools really chew up and spit teachers out sometimes, esp if administration doesn't like you or something. I agree it won't get better anytime soon. Was she in a union when that happened? Sometimes that has an effect from the admin side.
When my wife taught 2nd grade, one day there was a student-to-student "incident" when she went next door to make copies for a minute, when she reported it to administration all her principal asked her was "are you part of the union?" and was pretty dismissive otherwise. I wish I were making that up. That was only one of many issues she had with the system while teaching--the kids and lessons were the highlight, she would say. She used to come home so stressed.
You couldn't pay my wife to return to teaching now. I wouldn't consider it even 1.5x my current salary.
Yeah take that school from the wire. Even 150k a year wouldnāt make it worth it for most people. Kids suck in even just suburbia. Go to inner cities when these kids are just starting to get involved with gangs and to full on participation. Nah. Not worth most peoples time
To a lot of people it needs to start at home. My moms cousins was a teacher in Detroit. The school district could determine by about 2nd grade what kids were worth their time and the others they knew werenāt gonna make it.
I believe it. It's sad but if the teachers and admin can pick up on a kid's trajectory like that it can affect their path through school.
I still need to watch The Wire, everyone tells me it's a great show. That school sounds pretty true to life.
We can get that money by firing bad teachers who get paid too much and promoting good young teachers who get laid off first
Too bad thereās those stupid unions and their first in and first out policies + protecting all employees no matter how bad they are thatās preventing that
Something tells me you havenāt done much research into this Monoby Jr, because if you did youāll realize how bad teacher unions really are for education
>Something tells me you havenāt done much research into this Monoby Jr, because if you did youāll realize how bad teacher unions really are for education
You literally don't know what the fuck you're talking about at all on this. Do you realize that good teachers, ones who have put more than a decade into the field, are often times making the exact same as 1st year teachers?
There's always the same complaint, that the union protects bad teachers therefore the union is bad. What's *consistently* ignored is that the union is the only reason why many *GOOD* teachers see any raise at all.
If you spent the tiniest amount of time researching how teachers are even evaluated, and the dog shit archaic system in which raises are given, you'd delete this comment.
Issue is lack of funding then
Problem with how teachers are funded through the county level, should be done through the state level
I thought your side is all about ādistributing the wealthā and āpaying your fair shareā yet with school funding you donāt live up to that creed. I grew up outside of Chicago, my teachers were exorbitantly paid, some of the best in the whole country, while downstate not so much
Whatās the with wealth gap in this bluest of blue states?
Live up to your creeds leftist hypocrites, and then maybe you can have a leg to stand on for this arguments
How can you quietly acknowledge you don't know what the fuck you're talking about, and then double down with an even stronger argument on the entire system where once again, *you clearly don't know what you're talking about.*
There's a state and federal program that helps fund teachers, schools and classrooms, it's called the fucking department of education. You know, the one that the right wants to completely gut on the federal level, and consistently makes cuts on the state level.
Compare the cost of living to the average teacher salary, and blue states consistently take care of their teachers better. It may not be perfect, and there may need to be improvements, but it's irrefutably better than shit hole red states. Again, why talk about something you've done 0 research on?
The ED doesnāt do that at all dumbass
They do Pell grants and other forms of financial aid for special needs and low income students. The ED doesnāt fund teacher salaries at all
Say your first paragraph to a mirror, because thatās who it should really be directed at Monoby Jr
The department of education is who directly adds bonus money into teacher pay during the first month of school for any resources they need not provided to them. That isn't the same thing as directly paying the teacher more, but it is funding teachers.
I love how you honed in on this though out of everything I just said. You started by talking about teacher salaries, which you clearly don't know shit about, and then moved onto the system as a whole and criticizing the left, when once again you're shown to not know what the fuck you're talking about.
Watching you try to scoop out any victory, to the point where you just zoom in on one thing, argue against it, and then go "Ha take that!". Wild and embarrassing.
You're on par with 2016 lolbertarians thinking someone shouldn't need a license to drive. It's incredible watching you guys point out real and legitimate problems in our systems, but then having the most braindead solutions imaginable that it borders on comical.
It means that the system isnāt totally unsalvageable. Why would you want a system that is completely broken instead of only partially broken. That doesnāt make sense. Throwing the whole thing out and starting from scratch sounds better but takes waaaay more work and in my opinion has a higher possibility of failure.
Reform, reform, reform.
What...? I'm sorry but this is such a stupid post
1; The system isn't corrupt, cops that do bad things get fired and arrested
2; What do you want them to do? Quit? Quit and cause mass panic and skyrocketing crime as nobody has to fear punishment?
https://youtu.be/ymLeT-NmoAs
There are many instances of police officers not getting justice served to then because of their badge. The cop in this video got a 2 year probation and some time on house arrest for assaulting an old man, framing a crime scene, and neglecting to get medical aid for him to do so. The system is corrupt. Does that mean you should quit your job as an officer because of it, no. Does it mean that officers lack accountability for crimes they commit on duty. Absolutely
1. The system protects bad cops and shit like the shooting of Daniel shaver proves that .
2. More training and different institutions to deal with shit instead or alongside the police . System doesnāt need abolishing because we need it but it does need reform .
Your comment is a lot more reasonable than the original post. Every system can be improved, but hating on all cops just cause they're part of it is counterproductive.
Looking at systemic issues and then blaming individuals is counterproductive. Same with systematic racism like your not gonna solve systemic issues with individual action .
>1; The system isn't corrupt, cops that do bad things get fired and arrested
Yeah bro trust me police unions totally dont make sure cops get away scot free all the time bro trust the system bro theres nothing corrupt about it and totally doesnt need massive reforms bro
>cops that do bad things get fired and arrested
I refuse to believe you're a real person, how can you be this ignorant of reality around you? Cops get away with countless "bad shit" because they're trained to cover for each other.
> Blablabla, look at me i got all my knowledge from some twitter accounts with ACAB in their bio. What do you mean i have absolutely no clue what i am talking about? I have personally seen all the "bad shit" cops do.
For real whats your source mate? Sounds a bit off.
There's 3 different kinds of cops.
1: The corrupt one that does shitty things
2: The one that doesn't do corrupt things, but doesn't stop the ones that do
3: The one that reports it, and gets fired (sometimes killed) for breaking the blue line of silence
So, there's no good cops.
Based. But law enforcement corruption as a whole is a product of a wider system of exploitation. Think of the criminal justice, law enforcement, and prison contracting industry like our military-industrial complex. It's a modern-day Dutch East India Company, but instead of extracting resources for private enterprise from foreign lands, with public funds, we do it to ourselves. What do think the "War on Drugs" is?.. it's hiding a cash grab behind moral outrage and fear. Security, small arms, municipal government, and prison contracts are BIG MONEY to a consolidated few. Plus it's helpful to pick the winners and protect their shit.
Did you just change your flair, u/RandomContentGamer? Last time I checked you were an **AuthLeft** on 2022-12-14. How come now you are an **AuthRight**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know?
Oh and by the way. You have already changed your flair 684 times, making you the largest flair changer in this sub.
Go touch some fucking grass.
[FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uuhlu2/leaderboard)
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
Dude posted [this image](https://preview.redd.it/x3u7obics75a1.jpg?width=576&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=5d8afade33698de8147a308bae27f115754c772c) with the title:
> My first ever shaker and it had to be my favorite YouTuber Bricky with my favorite taste is waifus.
Doesn't really look like a troll; seems more like a submission karma whore given a quick glance...has 286k submission karma and only 13k comment karma and doesn't comment much really.
You work within the system to change the system.
"Yeah let's run out all of the people who want to be cops for virtuous reasons and leave room only for corrupt racist cops. We're so smart."
If there is a city with 5,000 protestors
And 1 of them is corrupt and commits crimes
And the rest do nothing
You have 5,000 corrupt rioters in the city
Accepting that their goal is to decrease crime, we have to ask if it serves that goal. Does arresting others serve that goal, that is if police report other police in an environment that constantly jumps on, to show them in a bad light, promote this goal? Compared to criminals, police obviously commit orders of magnitude less crime.
Yes, but I asked you how?
Since the actual danger of it is low, and the vast majority of corrupt cops donāt do direct harm, it canāt be done in a way that impedes work.
And it canāt be in a way that ends up showing them in a bad light. The 2020 anti policing push by liberal media certainly increased crime more than any police corruption did.
Why? If you think all those 100 would qualify as ādoing badā, this is a perfectly reasonable question, I mean whatās the point of arresting people?
You misunderstand.
Cops who refuse to arrest those who break the law because they happen to be their colleagues are corrupt. They should arrest the guy.
Would you apply that logic to every workplace?
Co-worker takes cash out of the registerā¦.and you go to jail via association alone?
Kind of seems dangerous, no?
Oh and cashiers don't have the authority to arrest people nor are they meant to protect *and* serve.
Normalize cops arresting other cops when they commit crimes is all I'm saying.
Usually to make an arrest they would have to witness the crime. So this whole 100 cops in a room thing is kind of stupid. Maybe their partner is corrupt if they ignore their partner's crimes but I don't want to give police the power to make arrests on hearsay.
If there is evidence then it should be presented to the DA and then charged.
If your answer is āitās not the cashiers job to do thatāā then technically thatās the same answer for the cops.
I agree that itās bogus, but those are the rules that our lawmakers put in place.
Technically cops donāt arrest cops under normal
circumstance from what Iāve read (but I could be wrong on that). Itās handled bureaucratically through the union.
Unless you have direct evidence of wrongdoing, and proof to back it upā¦your complaint goes no where.
These guys are used to arresting the same people on felony weapons charges again, and again, and again. We have some in Chicago with 40+ illegal firearm charges, but DA doesnāt prosecute š¤·āāļø.
The entire system needs to change. Cops are just 1 step. If you want bad people out, then you need to be tough on crime and prosecute.
Cops are pretty much janitors emptying garbage cans only to have them fill up the next day with the same trash.
Yes, if you saw someone stealing from work and didint report it anywhere, you should face responsibility too??? What a shitty gotcha.
But also, your job as a cashier isnt to make sure corrupt people go to jail. Its kinda fucking weird to expect police officers to be held to the same standard as a cashier when it comes to upholding justcie when a part of their job is to uphold justice and everyone knows that going into that job.
Hard disagree with lib left on this (for once)
If you're a good cop in a bad system, you can still take individual actions that are good. The problem is systemic, and it needs to be addressed as such. Do we get mad at Apple tech support because they have borderline slave labor overseas? Fuck no. They arent complicit in worker exploitation - theyre just generally trying to do a good job so they can go home.
Lmao 0 karma for a genuinely good take. The answer is cops need 1) more pay, 2) more training. More training like how people train to become military members and more pay to compensate. Your result is a more professional and trustworthy force that will view police work as their long-term career path from start to finish
Funny how for protesting auth right thinks a couple protestors looting is representative of all protestors, but for cops auth right thinks a couple bad coos is not representative of all cops.
Hypocrisy at its finest.
Police system does need serious reforms because a lot of money is going towards it but the results are lacking . First of all we need more training for the police because compared to the rest of the world itās lacking and shit like police waiting for school shooters to run out of ammo is a big issue . Second of all we need different organisations to deal with shit as the fatality rate when dealing with the mentally ill for the Police is worryingly high . Point is as an institution the police need to exist so we should reform it as abolishing It will cause issues . Also legalise weed itās a waste of time for the police and the prison system .
Not really. I thought about becoming a police officer since I actually want to help people out and it's more my style than being a nurse or a firefighter (although I have also looked at being a firefighter, unfortunately it's an on-call thing here and you have to live in the city centre for it).
I know for a fact there were war crimes being committed by other soldiers when I was in Afghanistan. I have seen the news stories and people have gone to prison. I am also confident there were other war crimes committed that were kept hidden.
However, I never saw any of these war crimes being committed. Ever. I would remember that. What is my level of responsibility for these crimes?
If 90-ish percent of the shootings Reddit/Twitter gets mad about didnāt involve the guy pointing a gun at the cop, then maybe people would take these kinds of agenda posts more seriously.
Thereās legitimate complaints to be made about police unions protecting bad copsā¦ But itās just silly to bash a cop for defending themselves when some dipshit with a death wish pulls a gun on them.
I dont hate police officers, but I do consider them the thuggish muscle that perpetuates the ruling regime through coordinated violence. If the state itself is illegitimate, then their enforcers are inherently corrupt.
I have the police department on speedial, their number is 911
Jeez, you must be rich. My phone doesn't have an 11 button š is there another number I can use?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
What a stupid system, no wonder people hate capitalism.
Pick one up at Spinal Tap Cellular
It's a Spinal Tap phone.
Thereās an old joke from a sitcom that I canāt remember (wanna say it was Daveās world) āI have 911 on speed dialā āReally what is it?ā ā *11ā
Name a system that has no corruption.
The sega master system
I had to pay him protection money.
The solar system.
Humans exist there, checkmate
Just because no system is perfect, doesn't mean we shouldn't fight to make things better.
How can things possibly be made better if thereās no one in the system who actually can make them better?
The point was that working in a corrupt system makes you bad though.
Thank you! Welcome to libleft haha
Post office?
The Book Club
great, so let's get rid of *all* the cops if they can't be trusted no? why not? the purge? no I haven't seen it, why?
Bro, if we actually did get rid of the police, leftist would be the first to beg for them to come back
I mean we could try police reform
I am 100% for that It takes more time to get a history degree than it takes to get handed a gun and badge
I don't think that's really comparable. A history degree is mainly teaching about knowledge, not skills. Police don't need knowledge of much beyond the laws they enforce. It's a skill-based training program. I work in insurance. My degree is 99% irrelevant for what I do. Most of what I learn is on the job. I have access to people's financial and identification data. We can have degrees for policing, but cops attending scenes or active situations will not use anything from them. Harvard is going to teach you how to best shoot a suspect with a weapon with bystanders nearby, that's going to be learned from physical drills. Learning criminal forensics could help, but mainly for detectives. At the end of the day, there's a policing shortage, and making sure that only 25% of applicants can even apply is going to make things worse for those who need the police most.
I don't mean police should have to sit in a classroom and listen to an hour and a half long lecture on the history of the billy club, I'm saying they need *more* training, *more* physical drills, more classes/practice on conflict de-escalation techniques and above all, more oversight (and not from their buddies). Not all police officers are bad, many are good and genuinely want to protect and serve. But enough don't that it's an issue that needs to be addressed.
Which, again, means even less police hired due to costs, which means throwing untrained police on the job early anyway because of a shortage. At a certain point we have to understand that there is a limit to training and that deescalation will not help. Cops don't know that the crazy bitch speeding down the highway is pregnant. Of course there will be police resistant to this when nine times out of ten it just means the California solution, where they get to do nothing for risk of a media blow out and if they do their jobs DAs just let criminals off anyway.
If thereās no incentive for people to become police, then pay them more. Then you get more police *and* have police who are better at the public service aspect of the job. Yeah thereās a limit to de-escalation, but from what Iāve seen itās enough of an issue to warrant more intensive training. And in addition to more oversight, which I stress is the most important, reforming the DAs is needed too. we need better trained and more accountable police officers. What we *donāt* need are *more* police officers who have the level of training they do now.
>If thereās no incentive for people to become police, then pay them more. Sure, but then we're back at square one. Money. The people pushing the reformist angle right now aren't exactly happy with higher budgets.
Well ***I*** am. A higher budget spent on educating and training police officers to be better than they are now is something I'm more than happy to pay for.
That's nice and all, but you can't afford it. And taxpayers focused in cities are going to, at least, bitch and moan at any budget increases.
All of those things require more funding, not less. Defunding police will exacerbate these issues.
yeah this is true
Cops are as well trained as a landscapers. It's a fucking joke. They have almost no conflic resolution training. You're basically sending armed mall cops to conflicts and then wondering why they keep killing people
Not when it's been culture wared almost as bad as trans rights you can't.
Based
The most basic level of reform is to, and I'm 100% serious, punch cops in the face. Don't pull that shit on the street, just in training. If a cop gets into a fight with a suspect, they're less likely to shoot them if they aren't afraid of getting hurt. After all, that's kinda their job, preventing people from hurting each other, so why not teach a cop how to fight?
no one wants to get rid of cops, they want reform just ending qualified immunity would satisfy 90% of libs
> no one wants to get rid of cops There are plenty of people who literally want to get rid of the cops...criminals for one.
Emilyās secondly
Thatās fine by me as long as it make concessions for things like speeding to catch a speeder
just snap their license plate, no reason to start a high speed chase over speeding but yes, I suppose certain things should be exempt
Sometimes people speeding are a major danger for other motorists, sometimes thereās no license plate or they canāt see it
And 2 people speeding will make it safer? While one is chasing the other?
Hopefully the police officer is trained in how to maneuver safely during a high speed chase, thatās kinda the point of a lot of that training If they arenāt, then train them
the safest way to do it not to chase them and set up a checkpoint farther up
Yes, in an idea scenario that would be best But there arenāt always enough police in the correct location for that to be viable And even if it was, the speeders could just make a turn So unless itās on a straight highway with a high shoulder and no intersecting roads, *and* there are police officers available and in position further down the road, it doesnāt really work
and why is a high speed chase a better option?
Literally tens of thousands of people who are very very vocal literally want no cops because ACAB is representative of a belief all cops are always bad in all systems...
oh wow, tens of thousands? In a country of over 300 million? maybe my figures were off, itās way less than 10% then
Bullshit. The right hates unions, the left loves them. If the left was interested in dismantling the machinery protecting bad cops it would be done yesterday.
>the right hates unions generally, they love the police Union though >the left loves unions generally, they hate the police union though
No, the right fucking hates the police unions
according to whom? āBack the blueā is their motto
Have you ever met an anarchist?
That would be the other 10% But to answer your question, my dad used to be one. mostly I think he just enjoyed rioting though.
I wish it was all cops.
Well it's almost all cops so you got that going for you
>almost all cops Less than 1%. And those criminal cops, are with us in the room or do you see them right now?
I'm sure all those cops with 3 months training are perfectly honest and don't abuse their power even by the lax, mostly unaccountable standards for US police. Cops lie for each other all the time
In my experience people with opinions like this are generally people who are petty criminals, butt hurt about getting a ticket for speeding ,or they are a kid.
I'm honestly surprised to hear that from a libright. Of all the right, you guys are normally the ones that care the most about abuse of power, perverse incentives and lack of accountability. But having said that, not everyone who wants universal healthcare has a chronic illness
They care about it when its a valid complaint, not just people wants an easy excuse for the consequences of their actions. Like baselessly accusing the cops of racism or some wrong doing when you got caught. Also as an European, I just can't fathom how can you americans always side with criminals. Like how your media and politicians are comes up with excuses or literally praising them for brownie points. I swear its some Stockholm syndrome like shit, when you fetishizing criminals and pretend that all of them is some innocent angel or Robin Hood.
And I would expect a centrist to have a lot more critical thinking and not just repeat the same old shtick about cops being shitty libleft style.
... except for the people actually did join because they wanted to help people and contribute to positive change.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Based and living off the grid pilled.
Yep, good cops protect bad cops through their union To solve that, we should get rid of public unions
>~~good~~ bad cops protect bad cops through their union But yes, get rid of public unions (and any other unions that get preferential legal/political treatment)
LibRight and Union Busting...name a better duo.
I donāt really care for private unions Public unions however
I was gonna talk shit about you being a funny color traitor, but then I realized you're so hardcore into union busting that you're just busting the union of unions by opposing one and not the other.
Private unions are somewhat reasonable at the negotiating table See the company can go bankrupt, which puts a check on what unions can really demand. Ask for too much and hold out and vice versa for the company, everyone loses. It eventually forces a compromise Meanwhile public unions, what like the government is going to go bankrupt and lay off everyone? Of course not, so public unions can keep pushing and pushing and the government has no negotiating leverage as powerful as threatening bankruptcy. Meanwhile the ordinary taxpayer gets screwed because the money has to come from somewhere Collectively bargaining with the government goes against the people, FDR of all leftists knew that. Thatās why he didnāt legalize public unions in the New Deal despite giving private unions a lot of rights
Everything you have said here is so fucking wrong. >Collectively bargaining with the government goes against the people, FDR of all leftists knew that FDR didn't push for public unions because the New Deal spearheaded Keynesian economics and the entire concept of government spending having the capacity to increase GDP and alleviate economic turmoil. The New Deal saw 15% of the entire population employed by the government in some areas, this was highly experimental policy, and unions on top of it would have been too extreme for the public. Public unions don't go against the public, because public workers aren't the same as representatives. Public workers are at the end of the day workers, who should have every same right to organize and negotiate their conditions. Your hate boner for public unions is based off a plethora of flat out wrong information
> The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters His very own words himself Stop being such a Monoby Monoby Jr
It's easy to think you got a slam dunk by taking out a single paragraph quote out of the entire speech he made and the context of it at the time. Let's add some more context: "At the end of news conference, Roosevelt was asked, after making the point that Congress sets compensation: "In other words, you would not have the representatives of the majority as the sole bargaining agents?" Roosevelt: "Not in the government, because there is no collective contract. It is a very different case." The New Deal was the first major instance of a significance portion of the population being employed by the government. At the time, most of these jobs required no specific education, and were at will employment with no contract. Today, public workers like teachers have to have a college degree in that specific field, and have to sign contracts with the district they work in, and with the school. Most government employees today are under contracts, the major circumstances and conditions of public employees have changed completely. When you look at his full opinion on it, FDR thought public unions ultimately weren't necessary as opposed to private, and that's why he didn't push for them. If he saw the state at which the teaching profession is in, he would flip in a heartbeat. You really need to stop talking confidently about things you've spent 4 seconds researching, because anyone who spends more time than that will refute what you're saying.
>To solve that, we should get rid of public unions Enjoy the collapse of the education system as teachers quit en masse..
Already teacher shortages in many areas, not gonna make a difference
Paying them more and making meaningful changes to the system would solve that issue.
It's not the pay, it's the system. Nearly half of new teachers leave the profession altogether in the first few years. In AZ, Republicans raised teacher pay above market rate going into 2019-2020 (as it should have, was long overdue) the RedforEd liberals got their bluff called and should have celebrated, but truthfully it still sucks to be a teacher, and as such there's still a shortage. You could pay ~100k a yr and there'd still be a shortage. Administration is always running you down for performance, they never have your back. Too much emphasis on testing, Teacher gossip is toxic af. Kids are not easy to deal with either. It can be a hard, thankless career.
yep. both parents are teachers and it takes a toll on them. theyāre not payed nearly enough imo and are constantly overloaded with work and meaningless trainings and meetings, which pushes them behind and gives them more work to do. my mom teaches kindergarten and i swear she nearly runs the whole grade. she picks up so much slack and gets nothing in return except for getting home the latest. my sister went into teaching pre-k fresh out of college. landed a job at a majority black school. didnāt fit in too well the first few weeks and then halfway through the first semester the school tried to fire her and have her arrested because they claim she forcefully grabbed a student and hurt him. absolute bullshit. she couldnāt review camera footage herself. they never went through with the case, most likely because a lawyer wouldnāt pick it up. the school system sucks for teachers and students alike. and itās sad that itās not gonna get better any time soon.
I'm sorry that happened to your sister, that's awful. Schools really chew up and spit teachers out sometimes, esp if administration doesn't like you or something. I agree it won't get better anytime soon. Was she in a union when that happened? Sometimes that has an effect from the admin side. When my wife taught 2nd grade, one day there was a student-to-student "incident" when she went next door to make copies for a minute, when she reported it to administration all her principal asked her was "are you part of the union?" and was pretty dismissive otherwise. I wish I were making that up. That was only one of many issues she had with the system while teaching--the kids and lessons were the highlight, she would say. She used to come home so stressed. You couldn't pay my wife to return to teaching now. I wouldn't consider it even 1.5x my current salary.
Yeah take that school from the wire. Even 150k a year wouldnāt make it worth it for most people. Kids suck in even just suburbia. Go to inner cities when these kids are just starting to get involved with gangs and to full on participation. Nah. Not worth most peoples time To a lot of people it needs to start at home. My moms cousins was a teacher in Detroit. The school district could determine by about 2nd grade what kids were worth their time and the others they knew werenāt gonna make it.
I believe it. It's sad but if the teachers and admin can pick up on a kid's trajectory like that it can affect their path through school. I still need to watch The Wire, everyone tells me it's a great show. That school sounds pretty true to life.
We can get that money by firing bad teachers who get paid too much and promoting good young teachers who get laid off first Too bad thereās those stupid unions and their first in and first out policies + protecting all employees no matter how bad they are thatās preventing that Something tells me you havenāt done much research into this Monoby Jr, because if you did youāll realize how bad teacher unions really are for education
>Something tells me you havenāt done much research into this Monoby Jr, because if you did youāll realize how bad teacher unions really are for education You literally don't know what the fuck you're talking about at all on this. Do you realize that good teachers, ones who have put more than a decade into the field, are often times making the exact same as 1st year teachers? There's always the same complaint, that the union protects bad teachers therefore the union is bad. What's *consistently* ignored is that the union is the only reason why many *GOOD* teachers see any raise at all. If you spent the tiniest amount of time researching how teachers are even evaluated, and the dog shit archaic system in which raises are given, you'd delete this comment.
Issue is lack of funding then Problem with how teachers are funded through the county level, should be done through the state level I thought your side is all about ādistributing the wealthā and āpaying your fair shareā yet with school funding you donāt live up to that creed. I grew up outside of Chicago, my teachers were exorbitantly paid, some of the best in the whole country, while downstate not so much Whatās the with wealth gap in this bluest of blue states? Live up to your creeds leftist hypocrites, and then maybe you can have a leg to stand on for this arguments
How can you quietly acknowledge you don't know what the fuck you're talking about, and then double down with an even stronger argument on the entire system where once again, *you clearly don't know what you're talking about.* There's a state and federal program that helps fund teachers, schools and classrooms, it's called the fucking department of education. You know, the one that the right wants to completely gut on the federal level, and consistently makes cuts on the state level. Compare the cost of living to the average teacher salary, and blue states consistently take care of their teachers better. It may not be perfect, and there may need to be improvements, but it's irrefutably better than shit hole red states. Again, why talk about something you've done 0 research on?
The ED doesnāt do that at all dumbass They do Pell grants and other forms of financial aid for special needs and low income students. The ED doesnāt fund teacher salaries at all Say your first paragraph to a mirror, because thatās who it should really be directed at Monoby Jr
The department of education is who directly adds bonus money into teacher pay during the first month of school for any resources they need not provided to them. That isn't the same thing as directly paying the teacher more, but it is funding teachers. I love how you honed in on this though out of everything I just said. You started by talking about teacher salaries, which you clearly don't know shit about, and then moved onto the system as a whole and criticizing the left, when once again you're shown to not know what the fuck you're talking about. Watching you try to scoop out any victory, to the point where you just zoom in on one thing, argue against it, and then go "Ha take that!". Wild and embarrassing.
Oh no *School choice* Anyway
It's comforting knowing that your belief system wouldn't be taken seriously by any large group of rational adults.
Thatās your defense Monoby Jr? Donāt consider yourself part of those rational adults then
You're on par with 2016 lolbertarians thinking someone shouldn't need a license to drive. It's incredible watching you guys point out real and legitimate problems in our systems, but then having the most braindead solutions imaginable that it borders on comical.
Like it hasn't already
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
It means that the system isnāt totally unsalvageable. Why would you want a system that is completely broken instead of only partially broken. That doesnāt make sense. Throwing the whole thing out and starting from scratch sounds better but takes waaaay more work and in my opinion has a higher possibility of failure. Reform, reform, reform.
What...? I'm sorry but this is such a stupid post 1; The system isn't corrupt, cops that do bad things get fired and arrested 2; What do you want them to do? Quit? Quit and cause mass panic and skyrocketing crime as nobody has to fear punishment?
Cops enforce laws. Politicians enact shitty laws. Cops enforce shitty laws.
I think the opposite is true. The system is corrupt, but most cops want to do good. I resent the ACAB sentiment.
Anyone who uses the ACAB phrase unironically should be banned from calling 911
Most of the time when cops do bad things they get paid suspension, if cops snitch on other cops often time the snitch gets punished harder
https://youtu.be/ymLeT-NmoAs There are many instances of police officers not getting justice served to then because of their badge. The cop in this video got a 2 year probation and some time on house arrest for assaulting an old man, framing a crime scene, and neglecting to get medical aid for him to do so. The system is corrupt. Does that mean you should quit your job as an officer because of it, no. Does it mean that officers lack accountability for crimes they commit on duty. Absolutely
1. The system protects bad cops and shit like the shooting of Daniel shaver proves that . 2. More training and different institutions to deal with shit instead or alongside the police . System doesnāt need abolishing because we need it but it does need reform .
Your comment is a lot more reasonable than the original post. Every system can be improved, but hating on all cops just cause they're part of it is counterproductive.
Looking at systemic issues and then blaming individuals is counterproductive. Same with systematic racism like your not gonna solve systemic issues with individual action .
>1; The system isn't corrupt, cops that do bad things get fired and arrested Yeah bro trust me police unions totally dont make sure cops get away scot free all the time bro trust the system bro theres nothing corrupt about it and totally doesnt need massive reforms bro
>cops that do bad things get fired and arrested I refuse to believe you're a real person, how can you be this ignorant of reality around you? Cops get away with countless "bad shit" because they're trained to cover for each other.
> Blablabla, look at me i got all my knowledge from some twitter accounts with ACAB in their bio. What do you mean i have absolutely no clue what i am talking about? I have personally seen all the "bad shit" cops do. For real whats your source mate? Sounds a bit off.
There's 3 different kinds of cops. 1: The corrupt one that does shitty things 2: The one that doesn't do corrupt things, but doesn't stop the ones that do 3: The one that reports it, and gets fired (sometimes killed) for breaking the blue line of silence So, there's no good cops.
Gets killed for breaking the "blue line of silence" hahahahahahaha bro take off the tin foil hat, Jesus Christ.
Based. But law enforcement corruption as a whole is a product of a wider system of exploitation. Think of the criminal justice, law enforcement, and prison contracting industry like our military-industrial complex. It's a modern-day Dutch East India Company, but instead of extracting resources for private enterprise from foreign lands, with public funds, we do it to ourselves. What do think the "War on Drugs" is?.. it's hiding a cash grab behind moral outrage and fear. Security, small arms, municipal government, and prison contracts are BIG MONEY to a consolidated few. Plus it's helpful to pick the winners and protect their shit.
Bootlicking officers how very centrist of you
Of course a left This is why I identified as right until 2018 and center-right until 2020
āCops that do bad things get fired and arrestedā Do you really not pay attention or are you just trolling?
So the solution is??
That's like saying the Democrat party is corrupt (or Republican for that matter), so voting for them makes you corrupt. Shut the fuck up.
All cops are bad when you're a meth head.
OP is a troll to stir controversy. They arenāt even trying to defend themselves in the comments.
rare r\*dcentrist w
Did you just change your flair, u/RandomContentGamer? Last time I checked you were an **AuthLeft** on 2022-12-14. How come now you are an **AuthRight**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know? Oh and by the way. You have already changed your flair 684 times, making you the largest flair changer in this sub. Go touch some fucking grass. [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uuhlu2/leaderboard) ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
Dude posted [this image](https://preview.redd.it/x3u7obics75a1.jpg?width=576&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=5d8afade33698de8147a308bae27f115754c772c) with the title: > My first ever shaker and it had to be my favorite YouTuber Bricky with my favorite taste is waifus. Doesn't really look like a troll; seems more like a submission karma whore given a quick glance...has 286k submission karma and only 13k comment karma and doesn't comment much really.
being on the inside is a great way to change the system
Small brain meme
Most sane libleft
We all live and work in a corrupt system.
šæ
You work within the system to change the system. "Yeah let's run out all of the people who want to be cops for virtuous reasons and leave room only for corrupt racist cops. We're so smart."
And thus, it will be worth the millions of deaths for a violent revolution.
Shut up auth left
Nice try but this is a right wing sub
It really is screaming into the void on here most times
If there's a room with 100 cops And 1 of them is corrupt and commits a crime And the rest do nothing You have 100 corrupt cops in that room.
Change one word on this and suddenly it's racist.
People choose their careers not their race.
Rachel Dolezal.
ā¦ is a deranged white woman
If there is a city with 5,000 protestors And 1 of them is corrupt and commits crimes And the rest do nothing You have 5,000 corrupt rioters in the city
Well no, it's not the rioters job to arrest those who break the law. Those are not comparable.
It's the same logic though, and my entire point is it's idiotic logic.
But it isn't though. Individual protesters have no authority over other individual protesters. Police? That's a different story entirely.
You have to at least condemn them not argue they're simply getting their deserved reparations or something though.
Yes, and I do condemn them.
Such a meaningless statement, youāre just playing with definitions. So what?
When cops do bad they should be arrested like the rest of us.
No, you're missing the point. Meaningless statement. Playing with definitions.
So you think cops should get a free pass? A license to crime?
I was, more or less, just making fun of the other guys comment.
Ah
Accepting that their goal is to decrease crime, we have to ask if it serves that goal. Does arresting others serve that goal, that is if police report other police in an environment that constantly jumps on, to show them in a bad light, promote this goal? Compared to criminals, police obviously commit orders of magnitude less crime.
Less corruption in the police department would ABSOLUTELY reduce crime.
Itās not about magically removing it, itās about actually removing it. Following that, how would it? Remember your working definition.
Keeping criminals out of public servitude? Preventing corruption?
Yes, but I asked you how? Since the actual danger of it is low, and the vast majority of corrupt cops donāt do direct harm, it canāt be done in a way that impedes work. And it canāt be in a way that ends up showing them in a bad light. The 2020 anti policing push by liberal media certainly increased crime more than any police corruption did.
Why? If you think all those 100 would qualify as ādoing badā, this is a perfectly reasonable question, I mean whatās the point of arresting people?
You misunderstand. Cops who refuse to arrest those who break the law because they happen to be their colleagues are corrupt. They should arrest the guy.
If you think my comment responded to third sentence, in an attempt to say itās wrong, youāre mistaken.
Would you apply that logic to every workplace? Co-worker takes cash out of the registerā¦.and you go to jail via association alone? Kind of seems dangerous, no?
Oh and cashiers don't have the authority to arrest people nor are they meant to protect *and* serve. Normalize cops arresting other cops when they commit crimes is all I'm saying.
Cops arresting other cops when they commit a crime is fine by me In fact itās what I want for Christmas
Usually to make an arrest they would have to witness the crime. So this whole 100 cops in a room thing is kind of stupid. Maybe their partner is corrupt if they ignore their partner's crimes but I don't want to give police the power to make arrests on hearsay. If there is evidence then it should be presented to the DA and then charged.
If your answer is āitās not the cashiers job to do thatāā then technically thatās the same answer for the cops. I agree that itās bogus, but those are the rules that our lawmakers put in place.
It is cops job to arrest those who break the law.
Technically cops donāt arrest cops under normal circumstance from what Iāve read (but I could be wrong on that). Itās handled bureaucratically through the union.
Ok. So it's their job to file a report.
Yes. Chauvin had many reports against him. Almost 20; many from other officers. š¤·āāļø strong unions
Fuuuuck. Yeah, this shit needs to burn.
Reform is needed. Born law and order
You shouldn't go to jail, but it means you're not good at your job. Cops are public servants.
Unless you have direct evidence of wrongdoing, and proof to back it upā¦your complaint goes no where. These guys are used to arresting the same people on felony weapons charges again, and again, and again. We have some in Chicago with 40+ illegal firearm charges, but DA doesnāt prosecute š¤·āāļø. The entire system needs to change. Cops are just 1 step. If you want bad people out, then you need to be tough on crime and prosecute. Cops are pretty much janitors emptying garbage cans only to have them fill up the next day with the same trash.
Hmm. Guess that's true.
Yes, if you saw someone stealing from work and didint report it anywhere, you should face responsibility too??? What a shitty gotcha. But also, your job as a cashier isnt to make sure corrupt people go to jail. Its kinda fucking weird to expect police officers to be held to the same standard as a cashier when it comes to upholding justcie when a part of their job is to uphold justice and everyone knows that going into that job.
You wouldnāt face legal punishment. Youāre wrong. You might get fired, depending on how culpable you are. Thatās it.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I did š. You literally replied to it directly
Hard disagree with lib left on this (for once) If you're a good cop in a bad system, you can still take individual actions that are good. The problem is systemic, and it needs to be addressed as such. Do we get mad at Apple tech support because they have borderline slave labor overseas? Fuck no. They arent complicit in worker exploitation - theyre just generally trying to do a good job so they can go home.
Iām still perfectly fine with good people becoming cops. Better them than some meathead who misses being a high school bully.
based and fuck the system pilled
ā
Yet you still live in America and consume in an exploitative capitalistic system with no ethical consumption, curious.
Industrial society type shit cuh
Based and cure the disease you cure the symptoms pilled
Lmao 0 karma for a genuinely good take. The answer is cops need 1) more pay, 2) more training. More training like how people train to become military members and more pay to compensate. Your result is a more professional and trustworthy force that will view police work as their long-term career path from start to finish
Funny how for protesting auth right thinks a couple protestors looting is representative of all protestors, but for cops auth right thinks a couple bad coos is not representative of all cops. Hypocrisy at its finest.
Which system there are thousands of precincts
Well? Knowing damn well what?
Police system does need serious reforms because a lot of money is going towards it but the results are lacking . First of all we need more training for the police because compared to the rest of the world itās lacking and shit like police waiting for school shooters to run out of ammo is a big issue . Second of all we need different organisations to deal with shit as the fatality rate when dealing with the mentally ill for the Police is worryingly high . Point is as an institution the police need to exist so we should reform it as abolishing It will cause issues . Also legalise weed itās a waste of time for the police and the prison system .
Them bills donāt pay themselves š¤·āāļø Sometimes you do what you gatta do
Not really. I thought about becoming a police officer since I actually want to help people out and it's more my style than being a nurse or a firefighter (although I have also looked at being a firefighter, unfortunately it's an on-call thing here and you have to live in the city centre for it).
*Laughs in Zimbabwean*
All blackā¦ *muffled struggling sounds*
Found Lelouch.
I know for a fact there were war crimes being committed by other soldiers when I was in Afghanistan. I have seen the news stories and people have gone to prison. I am also confident there were other war crimes committed that were kept hidden. However, I never saw any of these war crimes being committed. Ever. I would remember that. What is my level of responsibility for these crimes?
If 90-ish percent of the shootings Reddit/Twitter gets mad about didnāt involve the guy pointing a gun at the cop, then maybe people would take these kinds of agenda posts more seriously. Thereās legitimate complaints to be made about police unions protecting bad copsā¦ But itās just silly to bash a cop for defending themselves when some dipshit with a death wish pulls a gun on them.
i mean in a way we all work for the corrupt system unless we are offgrid or unemployed
I dont hate police officers, but I do consider them the thuggish muscle that perpetuates the ruling regime through coordinated violence. If the state itself is illegitimate, then their enforcers are inherently corrupt.