TownieDeac
words are futile devices
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 76,189
- Reaction score
- 16,924
Very good thread with thorough research on reducing police violence:
If we simply abolished the police and spent all that money on healthcare we would be safer and healthier!
The state isn’t directly perpetrating anything.
Weird response considering the discussion around police brutality usually centers around the state’s allegedly negligent training and supervision. The state isn’t directly perpetrating anything.
Weird response considering the discussion around police brutality usually centers around the state’s allegedly negligent training and supervision. The state isn’t directly perpetrating anything.
I’m not sure how pointing out that the scope of the problem is small devalues lives. Seems like the size of the problem is relevant to resource (and brainwave) allocation, but maybe that’s just me.
I’m not sure how pointing out that the scope of the problem is small devalues lives. Seems like the size of the problem is relevant to resource (and brainwave) allocation, but maybe that’s just me.
Considering we are talking about 1,100 deaths per year, the vast majority of which are justified, in a country of 330 million people, I'd say we are doing pretty well.
It is not the policy of any state to kill people unnecessarily. That is happening because of a combination of negligent training and / or negligent supervision and rouge actors. Yes, the individuals who do the killing are imbued with that authority by the state, but the state is not directly perpetrating these deaths, and the state is not liable for them unless there is proof of negligent training and / or negligent supervision. Just because an officer kills someone, even if he does so intentionally, that does not make his act the act of the state.
I mean, this is just dead wrong from a legal perspective. In some sense it true, of course, but not in any sense that matters.
I don’t know what this means.