Police use of force

I mean, they didn't pass a cigarette tax to declare selling individual cigarettes on the streets an act of immorality.

Well, theoretically, it was a kind act of trying to prevent people from dying from lung cancer, but I doubt cigarette bans had such an altruistic purpose.
 
What exactly did de Blasio do to cause insubordination among the police? Did he personally strangle one of them to death for disobeying him? Did he order the murders of Ramos and Liu?

De Blasio created controversy with his response to demonstrations about police relations with minorities, after a grand jury declined to indict an NYPD officer in the death of Eric Garner, a Staten Island man who died after he was put in a chokehold during an arrest for selling loose cigarettes.

The mayor, whose wife is black, said he has spoken to his mixed race teen son about how he should act if he is stopped by police.

In speaking about protesters who were arrested and charged with assaulting police during a demonstration in New York, de Blasio used the word "allegedly," which some in the NYPD seemed to take as a slight.

...oh.

So he indicates that he's upset with the killing of Garner, and the police publicly display insubordination? Seriously?

There might be more to the story. But if the NYPD's whole grievance is that de Blasio didn't support them 100% when they used excessive force that needlessly killed a man, the insubordinate ones should be sacked and replaced with people who won't strangle someone for selling cigarettes.
 
If your boss throws you under the bus for political expediency, yes, you can damn well disrespect him like that and they did.

If you are prepared to be fired, that is.

But I guess we're just supposed to strike the words "cops can't" from our vocabulary.

The next election might be the end of the mayor...not so the cops, they will be around long after he is gone and they know it.

Not if they're fired. The people elect the mayor to run the city--not the cops. The police department reports to the mayor. That is who the people elected, that is who has the hiring and firing decisions.
 
Not if they're fired. The people elect the mayor to run the city--not the cops. The police department reports to the mayor. That is who the people elected, that is who has the hiring and firing decisions.

That can always change, for all you know. At the rate you're arming your cops, you might as well get rid of your army.
 
It already has, and that's the entire problem. It's a military junta, pure and simple, with the police union at the helm. With the elected mayor's legs cut off, that undermines the democracy.
 
They haven't done much, apart from sending letters damning people to hell while calling them parasites.

But you might never know; before you see it, the cop going 'round in an APC might take you away for owning cigarettes that are loose.
 
Or they can dig up dirt on the mayor and press him for corruption charges, the same way they did to the guy who filmed Garner getting killed. It's already happened to another mayor not too far away in New England.
 
What's the matter with getting rid of corrupt mayors? Sure, there's probably better ways but..
 
I can't support you in being anarchist.

I'm not an anarchist, I just dont share your belief government is moral.

Arguing about levels of sin tax is an entirely different argument, but I don't think that one state is immoral for simply having a higher tax rate than its neighbor on cigarettes.

So you think taxes are moral. How about a tax so large it creates a black market?

Black market activities are what is immoral in this situation. Let's at least get that one right.

Black markets are created by laws that violate our freedom - this country and its main religion were founded by lawbreakers.

And the man died not for selling illegal cigarettes...he died because he resisted arrest and was an obese man not in that great of health to begin with.

Facts do indeed matter, and as long as we excuse things like black market activity and resisting arrest, by blaming the government or the cops then such problems will indeed continue.

He died because politicians imposed such a heavy tax on New Yorkers poor people got into selling "illegal" cigarettes and those politicians told cops to arrest them. Thats the problem, more laws, more taxes - the triumph of the political class over morality and common sense.
 
What's the matter with getting rid of corrupt mayors? Sure, there's probably better ways but..

Daring to stand up to your OWN REPORTS is not corrupt. In fact--NOT standing up to them is.
 
Not if they're fired. The people elect the mayor to run the city--not the cops. The police department reports to the mayor. That is who the people elected, that is who has the hiring and firing decisions.

There's at least two cops who didn't outlast the mayor.
 
If your boss throws you under the bus for political expediency, yes, you can damn well disrespect him like that and they did.

The next election might be the end of the mayor...not so the cops, they will be around long after he is gone and they know it.

Never thought MobBoss was pro-union. All workers should be able to do so to their CEOs.
 
However, if the mayor fired all the cops who turned their backs on him--not once, but twice--I would back him 100%.
Amid tension, more than 20,000 attend NYPD funeral
Sgt. Myron Joseph of the New Rochelle Police Department said he and fellow officers turned their backs spontaneously to "support our brothers in the NYPD."
Well, at least we know some will be safe from such a ridiculous move if the Mayor were so stupid as to try that.
 
I think they should abolish the upper IQ limit for starters. I'm tired of having to deal with inflated ego's that can't be reasoned with.

There's an upper IQ limit for the police? No one with an IQ over, what?, 140 need apply?

What if someone with a high IQ was clever enough to test with a lower IQ?

But I'm guessing you mean something else than "upper IQ" limit. Maybe "lower IQ limit"?


"morality = the law"

To a first approximation, I think this is true. Though undoubtedly the law lags behind current morality. If it wasn't true, we'd have a whole bunch of laws we considered immoral. And that would be just very strange.
 
There's an upper IQ limit for the police? No one with an IQ over, what?, 140 need apply?

What if someone with a high IQ was clever enough to test with a lower IQ?

But I'm guessing you mean something else than "upper IQ" limit. Maybe "lower IQ limit"?

No, there is an actual upper limit which is like 100-110-120 depending on the department. If you score over your application is rejected.
 
That seems a bit bizarre.

What's the thinking behind it?

Do they suppose that someone too bright would get bored, or be incapable of carrying out nonsensical orders?
 
That seems a bit bizarre.

What's the thinking behind it?

Do they suppose that someone too bright would get bored, or be incapable of carrying out nonsensical orders?

The us army is similar in that if you score a really high gt they try there damndest to make sure you dont do some bonehead job. Im sure its something similar for police in that they try and coerce you into a more technical position.
 
That seems a bit bizarre.

What's the thinking behind it?

Do they suppose that someone too bright would get bored, or be incapable of carrying out nonsensical orders?

That is the official reasoning. Waste of expensive training and all that but that seems silly to me considering not everyone sticks around regardless.
 
ftfy and the law created by the 'overwhelming majority' is what creates the black market, not the other way around.

I mean, they didn't pass a cigarette tax to declare selling individual cigarettes on the streets an act of immorality.

I think those are both true. Prohibitionists aren't necessarily picky about the club being used. It's about using a club, and partial prohibition still allows for that.
 
I think policing in the United States could first benefit from more formal education requirements. This should assist them in making better decisions and would help to reduce the excess number of lawyers and people in prisons.

With that said, it should be noted that a very large industry surrounding law has been constructed in the United States that I believe is harming the prospects of any real positive change anyways so I am rather pessimistic that we will witness a reduction in crime anytime soon.
 
Back
Top Bottom