Stick Page Forums Archive

A Police Debate

Started by: Escarioth | Replies: 15 | Views: 3,666

Escarioth
2

Posts: 163
Joined: Aug 2013
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 26, 2014 4:54 PM #1287010
Here is an article:

Le Article - Click me*

Step 1: read the article.
Step 2: stare at article in amazement
Step 3: debate

What is your take on the current state of law enforcement as it pertains to the police department.

Here are some suggestions for debate:
- how much power should the police hold
- is it really just a select few police that give the department bad rep
- civilian rights when dealing with police
- prosecution of police officers - is it different from civilian cases
- the right of the police to use lethal force
- media portrayal of the police
- pets and the police

All opinions welcome. Please refrain from insulting individuals about their opinions.
TheShadow

Posts: 14
Joined: Sep 2013
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 26, 2014 5:49 PM #1287024
Hum. I guess I'll start the discussion, then...

Riots happen. People commit crime. But even still, do you think the police have the right to commit extreme brutality and killing of this sort, even if the situation warrants violence? Just this year, we've already seen two killings by police officers in the USA and the multiple violent clashes in Hong Kong, taking place in the so-called 'Umbrella Revolution'. Many people have come out injured from these conflicts, and in the former, two have been killed. Doubtlessly, there have been hundreds more similar cases like those in the article, that have taken place worldwide: all including heinous carnage both directed against and committed by policemen in the enforcement of justice.

Thus, I pose a question. Righteous cause or not, should the police be allowed this right? And what should the limits be?
Escarioth
2

Posts: 163
Joined: Aug 2013
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 26, 2014 6:43 PM #1287038
Quote from TheShadow
Hum. I guess I'll start the discussion, then...

Riots happen. People commit crime. But even still, do you think the police have the right to commit extreme brutality and killing of this sort, even if the situation warrants violence? Just this year, we've already seen two killings by police officers in the USA and the multiple violent clashes in Hong Kong, taking place in the so-called 'Umbrella Revolution'. Many people have come out injured from these conflicts, and in the former, two have been killed. Doubtlessly, there have been hundreds more similar cases like those in the article, that have taken place worldwide: all including heinous carnage both directed against and committed by policemen in the enforcement of justice.

Thus, I pose a question. Righteous cause or not, should the police be allowed this right? And what should the limits be?


I don't really like police - at least American police - but they are necessary for law enforcement. When someone commits a crime against you, it's the police you're going to need to turn to. In some circumstances, police use of violence and lethal force will be necessary - such as with armed kidnappings and such.
However, there needs to be a much higher standard of accountability for police. They feel free to use violence and lethal force with impunity because they know they won't get in trouble for it. They are treated above the law. TL;DR - a police badge is a licence to serve and protect the people, not to hurt and kill with impunity.
Also, crimes need to have reasonable punishments. Jaywalking does not warrant the use of violence by police. And a gun should not be a go-to for police. If the suspect is violent, but not armed, or even if they have a knife, a taser will do just fine. You're trained to handle such situations. It is the court's job to mete out judgement, not the police's.
Skeletonxf
2

Posts: 2,706
Joined: Aug 2013
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 26, 2014 9:38 PM #1287082
In my opinion the police department should film themselves at all times and be 100% transparent about every exercise of power they use. UK police tend to inform you of your rights and as to why they are arresting you, which I think works quite well - they also don't have instant access to guns so a lot of this violence can't happen at such extremes.
TheShadow

Posts: 14
Joined: Sep 2013
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 27, 2014 12:19 AM #1287122
Dunno...

Maybe a compromise between it, like tranquilizer guns instead of real bullets, would be better for the people and the police? They don't kill but neither do they do much damage either, or allow the apprehended much chance to retaliate.
Vorpal
2

Posts: 11,944
Joined: Jul 2007
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 27, 2014 11:35 PM #1287314
Pretty sure the NWA pretty exhaustively discussed the police in depth.
Myself

Posts: 7,010
Joined: Apr 2006
Rep: 10

View Profile
Jan 1, 2015 1:30 PM #1288602
I don't even know what the crux of the debate is, there doesn't seem to be one, but

Quote from TheShadow
Dunno...

Maybe a compromise between it, like tranquilizer guns instead of real bullets, would be better for the people and the police? They don't kill but neither do they do much damage either, or allow the apprehended much chance to retaliate.


there are so many things wrong with tranquilizer guns that I don't even know where to start
Vorpal
2

Posts: 11,944
Joined: Jul 2007
Rep: 10

View Profile
Jan 1, 2015 9:26 PM #1288685
I feel like this debate should be
"Fuck da police? Y/N?"
Escarioth
2

Posts: 163
Joined: Aug 2013
Rep: 10

View Profile
Jan 1, 2015 11:40 PM #1288721
Quote from Jutsu
I feel like this debate should be
"Fuck da police? Y/N?"


No. You can't just say no police. Police are necessary. However, the police-force partly seems to have lost sight of its duty to protect and serve the people. A democracy is about checks and balances, but no one seems to be doing their job of keeping the police in check and holding them accountable for their actions.
Azure
Moderator
2

Posts: 8,579
Joined: Jan 2013
Rep: 10

View Profile
Jan 1, 2015 11:49 PM #1288724
Quote from Escarioth
No. You can't just say no police. Police are necessary. However, the police-force partly seems to have lost sight of its duty to protect and serve the people. A democracy is about checks and balances, but no one seems to be doing their job of keeping the police in check and holding them accountable for their actions.


You're mixing up governmental terms. Democracy means votes get results. The checks and balance system is for the branch system of the government (Executive, Judicial, Legislative). The police are a department that works for the government, and aren't exactly part of any of those systems.
Vorpal
2

Posts: 11,944
Joined: Jul 2007
Rep: 10

View Profile
Jan 2, 2015 12:15 AM #1288728
Quote from Escarioth
No. You can't just say no police. Police are necessary. However, the police-force partly seems to have lost sight of its duty to protect and serve the people. A democracy is about checks and balances, but no one seems to be doing their job of keeping the police in check and holding them accountable for their actions.

I'm not saying the things you think I'm saying.

What I'm saying is fuck da police.
Escarioth
2

Posts: 163
Joined: Aug 2013
Rep: 10

View Profile
Jan 2, 2015 1:21 AM #1288754
Quote from Azure Kite
You're mixing up governmental terms. Democracy means votes get results. The checks and balance system is for the branch system of the government (Executive, Judicial, Legislative). The police are a department that works for the government, and aren't exactly part of any of those systems.


That is incorrect. The police falls under the Executive, which is why the President is the chief.
Exile
Administrator
2

Posts: 8,404
Joined: Dec 2005
Rep: 10

View Profile
Jan 2, 2015 6:24 PM #1289054
Quote from Azure Kite
You're mixing up governmental terms. Democracy means votes get results. The checks and balance system is for the branch system of the government (Executive, Judicial, Legislative). The police are a department that works for the government, and aren't exactly part of any of those systems.


Backing up what Escarioth said, police are part of the executive branch of government.

Democracy requires a system of checks and balances, he isn't mixing up any terms by pointing out that fact.
Azure
Moderator
2

Posts: 8,579
Joined: Jan 2013
Rep: 10

View Profile
Jan 2, 2015 7:09 PM #1289063
Quote from Exilement
Backing up what Escarioth said, police are part of the executive branch of government.

Democracy requires a system of checks and balances, he isn't mixing up any terms by pointing out that fact.


A democracy does require a system to keep things in order, but a checks and balance system isn't necessarily it. Especially in America's case where our own checks and balance system is pretty heavily flawed to suit the current dominant party's goals. That said, yes, police fall under the Executive Branch's jurisdiction, but don't directly influence it. They're a cog in the system, similar to schools or the DMV. And Escarioth, your argument about the President being the chief only pertains to Federal Police, not State or Local, where Governors and Mayors come into action. That's also ignoring departmental hierarchy and mentality, where different departments can have different views on how things are handled, and aren't always strictly withing regulation. In my own state, I've seen huge differences between the policies in departments, especially in the cases of responding to crimes.
Exxonite
2

Posts: 660
Joined: Jul 2014
Rep: 10

View Profile
Jan 2, 2015 7:59 PM #1289074
The police are granted a great deal of freedom to use their judgment regarding which laws to enforce, when and against whom. This wide range of options and authority can lead to the abuse of their power. Some police officers come to see themselves not as simply enforcers of the law, but as the law itself.

Hundreds of millions of the poorest people in the developing world are abused by corrupt police who extort bribes and brutalize innocent citizens, or are held in abusive pre-trial detention.
In many places in the developing world, rather than teach their children to run to the police if they are in trouble, parents must teach them to run from the police to stay safe from harm.


"Poor people regard the police as agents of oppression, not protection. Over and over again, poor people said that justice and police protection are only for rich businesses, rich people and those with connections."


-The Facts:
In any given year, there are about 10 million people held in pre-trial detention in the world’s prisons and jails.
In 2012, the IJM team and its partners estimated that 15-30% of prisoners awaiting trial in Nairobi’s Industrial Remand Prison alone may be victims of police abuse.
A recent study by the Kenyan Independent Policing Oversight Authority found that in nearly 2 out of every 3 felony cases examined that went to full trial, police never gathered enough evidence to charge (let alone convict) the accused person with a crime.

-Understanding the issue: In many communities in the developing world, the police can detain suspects in jail with virtually no evidence. In these circumstances, it is easy for officers to frame poor people who may have limited formal education in order to conclude investigations quickly. Poor people can be imprisoned on the basis of a mere accusation, simply for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, or even for being unable to pay a bribe to a corrupt officer.
With insufficient training on professional methods of investigation and virtually no accountability for bad police, corrupt officers can physically and sexually assault those they are meant to protect. The terrifying result is that billions of the poorest people live in communities in which the police not only fail to protect them from violent predators, but where the police themselves become violent predators.

One way that the police is abusing their power are the abusive officers. The normal abusers are not able to enlist the help of the criminal justice system to carry out their threats. Batterers within law enforcement, however, are. Officers tell their victim, "Call the police. Who are they going to believe?" , and that's true.
Advocates working with these victims must be knowledgeable not only about the general dynamics of domestic violence but also about police-perpetrated domestic violence tactics and the workings of the criminal justice system. Working with victims of officer-involved domestic violence has made us acutely aware that the standard remedies are often inadequate and may even leave the victim more vulnerable. We need to rethink our strategies on many different levels. Because this issue is so complex, we need to educate ourselves and other community providers before we can hope to adequately serve this special population.


The sad truth is that the police can abuse their power and they will. And I don't think there is much we can do to change that. The lust for power is a basic human attribute, as long as they have that power, they'll keep seeking more by abusing it.


If you are really interested in this theme and have free time, I advice you on reading this report : http://www.policefoundation.org/content/abuse-police-authority



sources: http://www.abuseofpower.info/ ; www.ijm.org/
Website Version: 1.0.4
© 2025 Max Games. All rights reserved.