Post-YouTube it potentially ends careers, causes potential unrest, and causes the city damage$.
Anyone think it will also cause the police to be less prone to violence?
(one of many articles on the recent NYPD incident in The Bronx)
On one hand, police brutality is never OK.
But on the other hand it seems like 9 times out of 10 the victims of it have prior offenses
I don't want to blame the victim... but it does seem like it is avoidable.
Ah, but that's part of what we demand of police officers: A large percentage of the people you come into contact with (the victims, the criminals, etc) be pretty much the lowest performing members of our society. However, even when they yell at you, strike you, and spit on you, you supposed to use only the force that is necessary to subdue them.
As a result, it isn't a job I think I would be good at.
At the moment, lots of people are either expressing outrage at the behavior of the police OR defending their actions. I think those bases are covered.
My mind is wondering whether the "new world" of having a likelihood being filmed has any effect on the phenomena of police brutality.
Will police control their desires to beat the crap out of someone? Or will we eventually get used to the videos and adapt an attitude of "that's why you shouldn't piss off the police"?
Note: Acts of police brutality have been caught on video since at least the Rodney King incident in LA in 1992. We are talking 20 years ago... But smart phones and YouTube makes catching it and publicizing far more likely.
Cool The Kid said:On one hand, police brutality is never OK.But on the other hand it seems like 9 times out of 10 the victims of it have prior offensesI don't want to blame the victim... but it does seem like it is avoidable.
Cool The Kid said:On one hand, police brutality is never OK.
amen to that.
There isn't one person on here who wouldn't like to kick the crap out of some criminal. It's tough not to take it personally when someone isn't following your orders and that's what causes this to begin with. But, if you notice, cops can restrain themselves when they catch a felon who shot an officer because they know that there's going to be TV coverage up the wazoo and they don't want to look bad.
Yes, the police clearly can refrain from violence when they need to.
All of which, makes me think about what makes media coverage important.
When we think about it, lots of people know that cops regularly beat the crap out of people they hate; it's just that the people who know are either powerless (i.e. local residents of very poor neighborhoods) or actually the police.
When something is recorded on video and then distributed via YouTube, people can't dismiss what actually happened as coming from people who "merely" have a grudge against the police and/or are poor, uneducated, whatever.
Hence, the beating becomes known because a variety of "credible" people actually believed it to have occurred. (today's vocabulary word continues to be epistemology)
However, the big question remains: Do we allow the police to be violent against those whom most of would all like to be violent against, or do we believe that the punishment for being a criminal should exclusively come from our court system?
For the most part, our court system implements non-violent penalties. ...The death penalty is rare, and I believe that we try pretty hard to control the violence that happens in prisons and jails.
Should the police be allowed to be violent in response to the violence that is done to them, and the violence they witness being done to others?
Of course, the trick is enforcing this "higher standard". After all, they are much like us.
Of course the police can't be "allowed" to use excessive force. Justice is best left for the courts and a jury. Otherwise we have anarchy. But, we need to know what provokes what we might think is excessive force. As shown in the Rodney King videos, he clearly resisted whereas the people who were in the car with him didn't and they weren't harmed at all. We can't take these videos "out of context." We need to know what the circumstances are.
While there are certainly some immediate situations that will get one a beat down (resisting arrest, spitting in a cops face, etc), I suspect that there are also less immediate influences.
For example, I was recently at a Criminal Justice Conference that stated that the average person who is arrested in New York City has been arrested previously 10 times.
So, there is a very good chance that the local cop and the local criminal already have had a previous, acrimonious relationship before any video is recorded.
Right... the perp's parents spared the rod and spoiled the child so the cops figured they'd step in and do the parent's job. I guess familiarity really does breed contempt (not necessarily of the court).
Actually, I suspect many of the people engaging in crime either got the crap beat out them regularly by their parents as kids, or had absent drug addicted parents.
Youtube isn't going to solve the underlying conditions that cause police brutality and crime, but it might make sure it happens less in view.
You should be held somewhat responsible when you decide to disobey a police officer and break the law when ordered to stop.
Criminals and regular citizens alike know that cops beat people at times. I stop when the cops tell me too. When I was younger and had a motorcycle I didn't. I took my life as well as the lives of other motorists in my hands by speeding away from police cruisers.
Citizens have to take measures to decrease the chances that criminals wont target them such as hide their phones, stay in late at night, walk in groups etc... If not you're more than likely increasing the chance that you will be robbed, attacked, or possibly beaten.
Maybe we should AT LEAST expect the criminals to follow some of the laws especially when the possibility that some overtired, underpaid, frustrated, rundown cop might catch up to them after breaking the law and beat them.
stop being stupid criminals . maybe they won't get a beating.
My professors would say: White collar criminals receive less severe punishments.
I would say become a white collar criminal than god. who ask you to be a stupid ass street thug.
AW-With the recession, white collar jobs that provide criminal opportunities (such as embezzlement, bribery, mail fraud etc) may be harder to get than menial labor ones (such as mugging, burglary, selling drugs, etc).
In response to this thread, a friend emailed me a recent NYT article about a cop who took it upon himself to photograph his daily work.
The friend stated that some cops have requested to carry those mini digital video recorders, but that permission had been denied to use them as evidence in court. In some cases, they were told they couldn't even use them on the job for their OWN purposes. It makes me wonder what the reaction will be to the officer described in the article publishing his.