Four officers are dead, including three Dallas police officers and one DART transit officer, after two snipers opened fire on police at the end of a protest against nationwide officer-involved shootings, officials say.
At least eight other Dallas police officers were hit, including three that are in critical condition; three additional DART officers suffered injuries that were not life threatening in the shooting.
We have a police force that has militarized as a direct result of the war on drugs. Not only in their equipment, but in their tactics. Stop and frisk, flash banging children based off of anonymous tips that result in nothing, shooting people's dogs after breaking into their house in the middle of the night to raid them, civil asset seizure, equitable sharing, AND THAT'S JUST THE STUFF WE KNOW ABOUT as a result of the huge increase in video capability over the last 10 years. Then when you look at the current figures, 1 in 50 black people are currently in jail. The war on drugs has been waged primarily in communities of color where people of color are more likely to receive higher offenses. According to the Human Rights Watch, people of color are no more likely to use or sell illegal drugs than whites, but they have higher rate of arrests. African Americans comprise 14 percent of regular drug users but are 37 percent of those arrested for drug offenses. From 1980 to 2007 about one in three of the 25.4 million adults arrested for drugs was African American. Source Hell, Nixon invented the drug war as a way to target blacks and hippies. We do not have a police force that protects and serves all people equally, We have an army that imprisons people for private FOR FUCKING PROFIT prisons, which are now the US's biggest lobbying group Police are on the front line of a long series of political fuckups and unless we do something to change the political system, we will not see the end of this violence. You think immigration is a problem? You think e-mails are a problem? They're different color socks on a single puppeteer's hands. Until you guys stop voting over who is going poison you least, it's not going to change.
I agree with the above but this: It would take about four cycles to dramatically change our representation if people would only vote. The people that are in office are responding to those that do vote. Bernie is evidence of what is possible. The system is designed to be pulled by the voter's interests. A lot of people died for that suffrage. It is a lack of interest that we suffer from.Until you guys stop voting over who is going poison you least, it's not going to change.
Do you know many people who would say they don't care that police kill innocent people? How do you distinguish "lack of interest" from a belief that voting, writing letters to Congress, marching and chanting slogans won't in fact make much difference?It is a lack of interest that we suffer from.
I am specifically talking about a lack of interest in the political process that we have. There are plenty of reasons to be cynical about it our governance, but on a historical basis, I think that we can agree that our degree of representation is near an all time high. Of course, one individual's vote counts for almost nothing. But that is a function of being part of an electorate counted in the hundreds of millions. It's not unfair, and I don't think it is something that should be remedied. Also, we do get to vote on local matters, where our mathematical influence is greater. I can't understand why or how a vote should 'make more of a difference'. Voting is fair because it doesn't. I do suspect the total electorate's will is likely different than the voting electorate. I can't imagine how it couldn't be seeing as they have different views on the value of voting. Also, there are demographic differences between the two. At any rate, it frustrates me to see people that have opinions and perspectives that I value not voting, while I see many people that have opinions and perspectives that I do not value vote. We make the world we live in. Not only by voting to influence the final count, but by being the kind of person that indicates that societies should have voting as a part of governance. It is a statement. It is a way of being. Must our influence mathematically matter in order for an action to be worthwhile?
I don't know if it's the same thing in the states but in Canada this is where people vote least even though it can matter most. It's mind boggling, and most people don't even know enough about the political process to even know they have a vote in provincial and municipal elections. There's definitely a lack of interest problem, most people I know just complain about the current situation while being completely unaware they let it happen. Also, we do get to vote on local matters, where our mathematical influence is greater.
Probably because the chances of a person making an impact writing a letter to Congress is effectively zero when compared to that same person tackling the same or similar issue starting within their own local legislature. That's much more of a non-zero value and holy fuck I wish people would give a shit about the politics immediately around them and making a difference there first instead of continuing to hedge our bets on some grandiose national change.
Hey, Mr. Plague O'both Your Houses - Every time you get all indignant and insist there's no difference between sides, you are excusing yourself from the duty of actually thinking about it. Every time you open your mouth to illustrate that you aren't thinking about it, you're demonstrating to everyone around you that you aren't a thinker. There are millions of people whose lives are arrayed around the differences between this side and that side and I guarantee you - they've thought about it more than you. And when they come up with a different answer than you, that should fucking give you pause. I know how hip it is to be apathetic. I know what an edgy thing it is to vote for Ross Perot. But you're losing sight of the fact that your grandmother's roommate at the nursing home votes, and she votes for whoever Fox News tells her to vote for. So you can act like you're above it all but the only person you're fooling is yourself. And you should be better than that.
I feel so sad for the good cops out there, they get lumped into the same group as the few bad ones and then demonised by the media and social movements. Then is anybody surprised there is an increase in hate crimes and violence against them? I just want to write to every one saying we love you, we appreciate you, don't feel hated. Now replace the word cops with literally any other group of people, doesn't that just say so much about the human race -- "I don't like that you exist"
Know what one of my least favorite questions is? How much would it take for you to take another person's life? People are always shocked when I say no amount of money would because 1. it's a terrible, leading question and 2. because of what you're talking about above.
The problem is we've created a siege mentality in Police culture, and that siege mentality causes a reciprocal siege mentality amongst the police. It does not encourage quality applicants to police forces and the antagonistic nature of the job drives the siege mentality ever farther until we end up in this vicious cycle where cops profile black men to death and black men avoid and/or antagonize cops on every possible level. 'member when the TSA first got started? It was full of every veteran grandfather with a desire to help his country. Then it got shittier and shittier and shittier until the employees at the TSA now are the thugs that lack the competence to do a real job but glory in the opportunity to inflict their will on people who can afford to travel. I know a cop who legitimately protected her town from a crazed coworker who was involuntarily committed because he threatened to mow down the elementary school. She was fired, sued under whistleblower protection and won over a million dollars. And her facebook feed is full of cold dead fingers rhetoric because she honestly believes that people should have the right to shoot anyone who threatens them in the face at any time. None of this is going to get better until we can get out of the bunker.
I though lack of quality applicants was a feature not a bug. Police departments are active discouraging smart conscious people from joining so that they can continue to be a band of thugs. The article you linked says the opposite but here is this from 2000 barring high IQ applicants from police is a thing in some areas. http://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/story?id=95836 The other big problem is Weed is so ubiquitous that most people have tried it at least once and that would disqualify you in many departments. So you end up self selecting for people that either are super sheltered or just lie well.Candidates must pass demanding physical and psychological tests, and they must have a drug-free history and pass a rigorous background check. Many departments administer polygraph tests.
The suspect was apparently blown up with a bomb carrying robot. Why is there not more talk about that? How is it OK to end deadlocked negotiations with a barricaded American citizen who is suspected of committing crimes, who have no hostages, and pose no immediate threat, by sending an earthbound drone to blow them up? Why not just wait it out?
I'm sure that once the dust settles there will be a lot of discussion about this robot. First I've heard about this tactic, though likely not the first time it was deployed. As for the waiting it out thing, that might work under certain circumstances, but in the U.S., once you start killing cops, there basically becomes a shoot to kill policy put on the scene. Didn't you see The Fugitive?
It may actually be the first time. This was a GTA-level tactic (read the description). Absolutely bonkers.First I've heard about this tactic, though likely not the first time it was deployed.