Which kind of person are you?
Let me set the scene:
You witness a police officer wrestling someone else to the ground, beating him with a flashlight, and curb-stomping him. You did not see what precipitated the encounter.
Do you:
A. Assume the guy deserved whatever the cop was doing to him, since he must be a criminal,
or,
B. Assume the cop is in the wrong unless evidence to the contrary can be presented?
In case A, if you believe the police first and judge the accused guilty before any evidence is presented, you are quite literally prejudiced. The word is derived from a Latin phrase that translates directly to "judgement in advance," meaning in this context judgment prior to, and without consideration of, facts and evidence. This is in direct contrast to the principle of "innocent until proven guilty," which is intended as a protection from police abuse. To apply this principle to the cop instead of the accused is absurd.
Only in case B are you behaving consistently with the fundamental principles of justice and reason. The burden of proof is always borne by the accuser, the individual making the positive claim. Demanding the accused provide proof of innocence is twisting justice into a caricature.
Even setting aside the innumerable examples of police abuse, error, and incompetence around the world, it is absurd to give the police officer the benefit of the doubt. His badge confers no moral authority. Even if we assume government operates as a "public servant," his status as an "authority figure" in fact places him in the position of higher responsibility to justify his actions.
If you like this post, please comment, follow, and resteem!
If you like this post, please comment, follow, and resteem!
Thank goodness for smartphones, video cameras and Facechat live.
Once the live broadcasts to the entire internet become the norm rather than the exception, maybe it will curb that kind of abuse?
Maybe it'll give everyone cause to consider their behavior a little more?
The moment a human takes up a job as a cop.... he's wrong .
So B it is to me .
The fact police exists keeps us from using the best self-defence against criminal active-tie towards us . Answering violence with self-defending violence is not tolerated by law and will be punished by jail-time . At least in the Netherlambs (NL) it dos. for example, By accident meeting a thief in your own house , attacking you at sight , and your instinct survival made you overcome the thief , well be ready to hear the jugde say ,
" you did wrong , you should have run away and called the cops , now you going to pay for what you did to the thief "
They practically give criminals the power to be, by giving them rights .
It's that simple NO cops NO criminals .
If i have to choose between two bad , i do not , ill fight both .
Let's try peace ;-)
I'd need more context, in a protest I would de-arrest the guy if I could.
In a random encounter on the streets I'm afraid the guy is at the mercy of the cop, I would record it, though.
That' easy: B
I don't like cops that much and I must admit that I have prejudices against them. Thinks I hear about them from other people is mostly negative. Last time I spoke with a police officer, he told me that he became a cop because he likes to beat up punks...
I'm sure there are good cops as well! Maybe I hadn't luck meeting them.
Do you feel safe when there are cops around? In my case often the opposite is the case although I'm not a criminal.
Exactly. Do you feel safe when there is a cop behind you, or do you feel like you're being sized up as prey by a predator?
Can't say I've ever come across a cop beating someone with a flashlight and curb stomping them. I think I saw this in American History X once though.
From just last year: http://www.sacbee.com/news/investigations/the-public-eye/article107619287.html
And it happens more often. This is just the handiest link I had. This happens quite often to people of all races, and only the proliferation of smartphones has allowed evidence to be available.
I'm kinda thinking that nowadays more people are just standing and recording while before smartphones they'd help the cop right away and prevent a beating. I don't know. Do we have any cops on Steemit here?
Why should they help the cop? Why do you believe the cop is in the right, and the one he is assailing is not the one in need of assistance?
When did the scenario you describe occur?
I used to know an old retired cop who told me a bunch of stories, one of them being one time when he gave this guy a ticket. Since he wasn't a dick about it the week after that same guy just chanced to pass by when the cop was wrestling with some dealer that was carrying and helped him put the cuffs on the guy. He said if that didn't happen he'd have had to pull his gun or be killed.
Who the fuck knows who's at fault. The way I see it, if someone intervenes at least no one shoots no one else.
"Police-sir, and citizen-sir, I am recording this altercation, and will submit evidence to the trial."
And then I would record it, to ensure that evidence of the assault is created.
Of course, this also relies on having a fair court system. Haha.
I'd find out about what actually happened
Ideally, yes. But what is your instinctive reaction before you find out? If both asked for your assistance, with which one would you sympathize?
My dad used to be a cop, but we asked him to do an early retirement... Cops are being generalized nowadays because majority of them are abusive. :(
Not all cops are bad, there are just some who abuses their power...
And as for the post, I chose B... I didn't see the whole thing, so I can't do any assumptions. ;)
The power they wield is bad in and of itself.
That could be true... They're there to serve and protect, not the other way around. :)
Who do they serve? The government. Who do they protect? One another from liability.
Ideally, they have to protect and serve the people, but realistically... it's as you have mentioned above. :(
I'm a b person. Though I am also prejudiced... to believe cops capable of this.
It isn't prejudice when evidence and reason actually support it. All cops are paid with stolen money to enforce bad laws, and all cops suffer from the same psychological pressures to be evil.
My dad tells of how he keeps getting dismissed from jury duty because he is open and honest about his distrust of police.
The thing to keep in mind, though, is that many who become cops don't understand the system. We had a neighbor, a very kind, good man, who was a cop, but when it became clear to his colleagues that he wasn't willing to enforce evil laws, he stopped succeeding. He managed to make a pretty long career of it before that happened because he was a rural cop, and he mostly just made traffic stops (like, actual ones, not in order to search a car).
I have a friend who wants to be a cop because she THINKS it'll be like studying crime scenes and trying to figure out whodunit, not wearing riot gear and pushing peaceful protesters. She's starting to come around, though that just means she's switched her focus to the FBI, and a whole host of further problems.
I'm a very bad cop