The only reason other forumites have chimed in with their opinions is because of the use of ANTIFA in my post. From that we have Oil rig employees and peace officers in the military. lol
I totally agree with your right to researching and posting the data, I implore you in the future to use common sense. That trumps (see what I did there) any and all data.
To say that an officers job is less dangerous than X. It's because of training and following that training to the letter is why the fatality numbers are lower. Bouncers and construction workers die due to misfortune or unfortunate events. Construction deaths are based off of insufficient training and cheap labor. Bouncers deaths come from the mixture of alcohol and testosterone. Officer's training is based on misfortune, unfortunate events, alcohol and testosterone.
I hope I haven't offended anyone but I do have a swift an assertive reaction to bullshit and will call it out.
Whats that old saying again? Opinions are like_______. Unfortunately in this day and age there are a lot of opinions walking around.
I implore you in the future to use common sense. That trumps (see what I did there) any and all data.
That's a false statement if I ever saw one. So called "common sense" is nothing but excuse for intelectual laziness and usage of comfortable simplifications. There is no intelectual merit in common sense.
@TakisMegas I don't know why others responded to you earlier, but I doubt it was to do with ANTIFA. Certainly in my case it wasn't - I was trying to promote an evidence-based approach to decision making, which is one of my hobby-horses. The point has already been made that what you think is common sense will not be the same at all as someone else thinks - and making policy on that basis is therefore unlikely to lead to general agreement. I think you have in the past criticized decisions based on religious views, which is an extreme example of wishing to make policy based on 'common sense'.
Having said the above as a general point, I appreciate that you have made some specific points in your post as well. I agree that the level of training for police will, on average, be significantly greater than that for a construction worker - an introductory policing course will be around 800 hours in the US, although a significant element of that will relate to things unconnected with safety, e.g. understanding the law and report writing.
In addition to the lack of training you refer to there are other problems in the construction industry that affect safety. For instance employers may provide inadequate equipment, while many construction workers are paid on a piece work basis and therefore have a financial incentive to ignore safety requirements which slow work down.
Nevertheless, while I agree there are issues that should be explored further, I still believe you need to follow the data. Even if training has helped reduce police fatalities the point remains that the level of actual deaths and serious injuries is far below the level most people believe, i.e. public impressions don't currently reflect reality. That's not a good basis for decision making.
Police officers have to deal with some extremely dangerous situations, but their job is far more than just running around shooting bad guys. They mediate disputes; record data; monitor the streets, process paperwork; analyze data; track down, arrest, and transport suspects; and communicate with probation officers, prison officials, judges, lawyers, analysts, nonprofits, journalists, and criminals themselves. A police officer's job is much more intellectual than a lot of people give them credit for.
An authoritarian police state is already well underway in Trump's America. Look at this footage of a nurse being arrested for following hospital procedure and not giving in to a cop who doesn't even have a goddamn warrant for what he is asking for. Insane:
I recall the President of the United States at a recent rally in Staten Island calling for cops to be tougher with suspects. It's not like they needed any encouragement in that regard. Now they are also roughing up nurses who are simply protecting unconscious patients from illegal blood draws. Christ. I think it's long past time this country needs to come to grips with the fact that it's police forces are FILLED with people who are wholly unqualified from a temperamental standpoint to do the job without breaking the law themselves.
Without knowing more, right off that cop would get a failing grade from me, just the words he uses alone escalate the situation. Resorts to the old impatient, do it right now or else, do it my way and I'm done. Dangerous to all involved do to his limited skills in negotiation, his ill-preparedness, and his impatience.
Police officers have to deal with some extremely dangerous situations, but their job is far more than just running around shooting bad guys. They mediate disputes; record data; monitor the streets, process paperwork; analyze data; track down, arrest, and transport suspects; and communicate with probation officers, prison officials, judges, lawyers, analysts, nonprofits, journalists, and criminals themselves. A police officer's job is much more intellectual than a lot of people give them credit for.
Indeed and overall it's less dangerous than some of the more irrational sensationalist people would have you believe.
Without knowing more, right off that cop would get a failing grade from me, just the words he uses alone escalate the situation. Resorts to the old impatient, do it right now or else, do it my way and I'm done. Dangerous to all involved do to his limited skills in negotiation, his ill-preparedness, and his impatience.
Apparently the Police wanted the Nurse to withdraw blood from an unconcious person and she refused. Why did she refuse? Not for fun or to be a dick or something. She refused because it was illegal to withdraw blood in that situation. She said the officers needed either an electronic warrant or patient consent to draw blood from someone who is not under arrest. The officers didn’t have either.
They arrested her in that hazardous "We're above the law, we are the law!" kind of way but later released her without charge. (oopsie).
I implore you in the future to use common sense. That trumps (see what I did there) any and all data.
That's a false statement if I ever saw one. So called "common sense" is nothing but excuse for intelectual laziness and usage of comfortable simplifications. There is no intelectual merit in common sense.
"There is no intellectual merit in common sense." WOW. I will continue no further.
The amazing thing about common sense is that you either have it, or you don't.
The key takeaway for me after watching that again is that there are 2 or 3 other cops standing there who don't do a thing. They don't tell the detective to chill out, they don't try stop him, nothing. They just stand there like bumps on a log. As if it's totally normal to walk into a hospital and arrest a nurse for following procedure and not start handing out blood samples to anyone who walks through the door. If cops want to start getting back some of the respect they are losing on a daily basis from many people in this country, they can start by maybe speaking up or actually doing something when their fellow officers are brazenly violating all rules and regulations. Their main union organization is, after all, called the "Fraternal Order of Police". It's not unreasonable to expect good cops to speak up when they themselves view their profession as a unbreakable brotherhood. Either protecting the public is important, or protecting the thin blue line is. Sadly, it's clearly the later. Most cops who DO speak out against bad cops are blacklisted and ostracized out of the profession entirely. Even if, say, 10% of cops are like the detective in the video, they are the bullies and personalities in the department who hold all the power.
The amazing thing about common sense is that you either have it, or you don't.
False, obviously. Everybody has common sense. Everybody has set of unchecked, unchallenged beliefs, that are comfortable to follow. Some just decide to do some intelectual work, others stay on "I believe it and it seems reasonable, therefore it's true!" level. There was pretty famous experiment, where people were presented with a riddle: "there is quiet, tidy man that likes order. Is he more likely to be librarian, or farmer?". Well, *common sense* is to say "librarian", but the answer is obviously farmer, because there are more farmers than librarians in society. But our brain in not wired to think in statistics, but in causal ways, so that seems to be counterintuitive. If anyone interested, here's a link: https://www.russellsage.org/news/behavioral-economics-puzzles-kahneman-and-tverskys-experiments.
@TakisMegas I don't know why others responded to you earlier, but I doubt it was to do with ANTIFA. Certainly in my case it wasn't - I was trying to promote an evidence-based approach to decision making, which is one of my hobby-horses. The point has already been made that what you think is common sense will not be the same at all as someone else thinks - and making policy on that basis is therefore unlikely to lead to general agreement. I think you have in the past criticized decisions based on religious views, which is an extreme example of wishing to make policy based on 'common sense'.
Having said the above as a general point, I appreciate that you have made some specific points in your post as well. I agree that the level of training for police will, on average, be significantly greater than that for a construction worker - an introductory policing course will be around 800 hours in the US, although a significant element of that will relate to things unconnected with safety, e.g. understanding the law and report writing.
In addition to the lack of training you refer to there are other problems in the construction industry that affect safety. For instance employers may provide inadequate equipment, while many construction workers are paid on a piece work basis and therefore have a financial incentive to ignore safety requirements which slow work down.
Nevertheless, while I agree there are issues that should be explored further, I still believe you need to follow the data. Even if training has helped reduce police fatalities the point remains that the level of actual deaths and serious injuries is far below the level most people believe, i.e. public impressions don't currently reflect reality. That's not a good basis for decision making.
Thank you for your well thought out response. Gave me intellectual wood.
I implore you in the future to use common sense. That trumps (see what I did there) any and all data.
That's a false statement if I ever saw one. So called "common sense" is nothing but excuse for intelectual laziness and usage of comfortable simplifications. There is no intelectual merit in common sense.
"There is no intellectual merit in common sense." WOW. I will continue no further.
The amazing thing about common sense is that you either have it, or you don't.
Isn't the definition of common sense entirely subjective?? And if it is, how is it possible to have it or not when no one's definition is guaranteed to be the same?? And also, if common sense DOES say that cops have a more dangerous job than taxi drivers, then, according to multiple compilations of statistics over the course of 3 separate years, then it just so happens that common sense is completely wrong. Because the data doesn't lie. Those studies were not done year after year in the hope that people like me would find the info and use it in an argument. They were done to find out what the most dangerous professions were in regards to fatalities on the job. And every single one of the 3 years found cab drivers being slightly ahead of police officers. So people can believe it's common sense to think that police officers have a uniquely dangerous job. But that just goes to prove that common sense doesn't mean much, because that perception is factually and statistically incorrect.
The amazing thing about common sense is that you either have it, or you don't.
False, obviously. Everybody has common sense. Everybody has set of unchecked, unchallenged beliefs, that are comfortable to follow. Some just decide to do some intelectual work, others stay on "I believe it and it seems reasonable, therefore it's true!" level. There was pretty famous experiment, where people were presented with a riddle: "there is quiet, tidy man that likes order. Is he more likely to be librarian, or farmer?". Well, *common sense* is to say "librarian", but the answer is obviously farmer, because there are more farmers than librarians in society. But our brain in not wired to think in statistics, but in causal ways, so that seems to be counterintuitive. If anyone interested, here's a link: https://www.russellsage.org/news/behavioral-economics-puzzles-kahneman-and-tverskys-experiments.
So, how much common sense or intellect do you have to have to bash the same thing over and over again and still not be satisfied. (like Trump or the Police or the MAN.) Is there any data on that?
I implore you in the future to use common sense. That trumps (see what I did there) any and all data.
That's a false statement if I ever saw one. So called "common sense" is nothing but excuse for intelectual laziness and usage of comfortable simplifications. There is no intelectual merit in common sense.
"There is no intellectual merit in common sense." WOW. I will continue no further.
The amazing thing about common sense is that you either have it, or you don't.
Isn't the definition of common sense entirely subjective?? And if it is, how is it possible to have it or not when no one's definition is guaranteed to be the same?? And also, if common sense DOES say that cops have a more dangerous job than taxi drivers, then, according to multiple compilations of statistics over the course of 3 separate years, then it just so happens that common sense is completely wrong. Because the data doesn't lie. Those studies were not done year after year in the hope that people like me would find the info and use it in an argument. They were done to find out what the most dangerous professions were in regards to fatalities on the job. And every single one of the 3 years found cab drivers being slightly ahead of police officers. So people can believe it's common sense to think that police officers have a uniquely dangerous job. But that just goes to prove that common sense doesn't mean much, because that perception is factually and statistically incorrect.
Then go play in traffic. Common sense is overrated. Or was it entirely subjective?
The amazing thing about common sense is that you either have it, or you don't.
False, obviously. Everybody has common sense. Everybody has set of unchecked, unchallenged beliefs, that are comfortable to follow. Some just decide to do some intelectual work, others stay on "I believe it and it seems reasonable, therefore it's true!" level. There was pretty famous experiment, where people were presented with a riddle: "there is quiet, tidy man that likes order. Is he more likely to be librarian, or farmer?". Well, *common sense* is to say "librarian", but the answer is obviously farmer, because there are more farmers than librarians in society. But our brain in not wired to think in statistics, but in causal ways, so that seems to be counterintuitive. If anyone interested, here's a link: https://www.russellsage.org/news/behavioral-economics-puzzles-kahneman-and-tverskys-experiments.
So, how much common sense or intellect do you have to have to bash the same thing over and over again and still not be satisfied. (like Trump or the Police or the MAN.) Is there any data on that?
I'm not even sure I understand the question here, but since I never claimed to have "common sense" in the first place, I'm not sure how it even applies. Nor was it once brought up that I was making an intellectual argument, but a statistical one. Is the argument here that one lacks intellect or common sense if they bring up new examples and stories of well-worn topics simply because other people may be tired of hearing about them??
The amazing thing about common sense is that you either have it, or you don't.
False, obviously. Everybody has common sense. Everybody has set of unchecked, unchallenged beliefs, that are comfortable to follow. Some just decide to do some intelectual work, others stay on "I believe it and it seems reasonable, therefore it's true!" level. There was pretty famous experiment, where people were presented with a riddle: "there is quiet, tidy man that likes order. Is he more likely to be librarian, or farmer?". Well, *common sense* is to say "librarian", but the answer is obviously farmer, because there are more farmers than librarians in society. But our brain in not wired to think in statistics, but in causal ways, so that seems to be counterintuitive. If anyone interested, here's a link: https://www.russellsage.org/news/behavioral-economics-puzzles-kahneman-and-tverskys-experiments.
So, how much common sense or intellect do you have to have to bash the same thing over and over again and still not be satisfied. (like Trump or the Police or the MAN.) Is there any data on that?
I'm not even sure I understand the question here, but since I never claimed to have "common sense" in the first place, I'm not sure how it even applies. Nor was it once brought up that I was making an intellectual argument, but a statistical one. Is the argument here that one lacks intellect or common sense if they bring up new examples and stories of well-worn topics simply because other people may be tired of hearing about them??
So, how much common sense or intellect do you have to have to bash the same thing over and over again and still not be satisfied. (like Trump or the Police or the MAN.) Is there any data on that?
I don't think I bash Trump or the Police or the MAN (I'm not even sure if you mean gender or not) *that* much. If I could, I would spend rest of my life bashing YA fiction or prequel trilogy of SW, but I don't think there is any serious data about that. But seriously - I'm not sure whatcha mean.
I implore you in the future to use common sense. That trumps (see what I did there) any and all data.
That's a false statement if I ever saw one. So called "common sense" is nothing but excuse for intelectual laziness and usage of comfortable simplifications. There is no intelectual merit in common sense.
"There is no intellectual merit in common sense." WOW. I will continue no further.
The amazing thing about common sense is that you either have it, or you don't.
Isn't the definition of common sense entirely subjective?? And if it is, how is it possible to have it or not when no one's definition is guaranteed to be the same?? And also, if common sense DOES say that cops have a more dangerous job than taxi drivers, then, according to multiple compilations of statistics over the course of 3 separate years, then it just so happens that common sense is completely wrong. Because the data doesn't lie. Those studies were not done year after year in the hope that people like me would find the info and use it in an argument. They were done to find out what the most dangerous professions were in regards to fatalities on the job. And every single one of the 3 years found cab drivers being slightly ahead of police officers. So people can believe it's common sense to think that police officers have a uniquely dangerous job. But that just goes to prove that common sense doesn't mean much, because that perception is factually and statistically incorrect.
Then go play in traffic. Common sense is overrated. Or was it entirely subjective?
We're comparing playing in traffic to presenting 3 separate reports of statistical data?? I didn't invent the numbers. I didn't even have to look that hard to find them, and find them repeated in subsequent years. I attempted to look for outlying examples that would refute my original thesis, and simply found that that statistics stayed the same in 3 separate years. If you are using common sense to define not playing in traffic, perhaps the real issue here is that common sense shouldn't also be applied to an idea (cops have a more dangerous job than cab drivers) which is easily disprovable (or at least highly suspect) simply by looking at a series of studies.
It's entirely possible my original post about this that I made on Daily Kos a few years ago will come up in a Google search on this topic (as I saw it last night). You can read the thread, as many people made the exact same argument you are: that even though I was presenting raw statistical data, I was being disingenuous because OF COURSE everyone knows that cops have a more dangerous job than these other professions. That was the crux of the argument. That they have a special job that doesn't apply to normal analysis. I had a professional statistician in the thread backing up my post at the time.
I do not forum hop. I don't care if your claim to fame is a post you made two years ago that you are proud of. I come on here to watch people in this thread bash the same things everyday ad nauseam. I find it humorous at certain times and at others, cringworthy. Also chiming in from time to time to break up the monotony.
I have been told that I am a racist and a bigot, only in this forum because my views on certain current events do not match the same as 4 or 5 other forum users.
Again, if someone believes that, being a bouncer is more dangerous of a profession than being a peace officer, they should seek professional help. I mean that in the most caring, compassionate and sincere way.
Have a happy and safe long weekend everyone. I hope to read more exiting and riveting Trump bashing after labor day. Remember not to wear white.
I'm at a loss here, just in general. It's hard to even have grounds to base a legitimate argument upon when the two sides can't even agree that the ground exists in the first place. In this case, I come in with hard data in the form of numbers in regards to job fatalities. I'm told those numbers are BS. So I go and find more numbers, from two different, later years. The numbers from those studies finds the data to be strikingly similar. At which part the argument becomes "well, that doesn't matter either, because everyone knows that isn't true." Maybe most people DO believe that isn't true. But that doesn't mean most people aren't wrong.
This isn't all that dissimilar to what we were talking about a day ago, in which 30% of Republicans believe Barack Obama was President during Katrina. Whatever has caused it, there are now between 2-4 different realities floating around in the public right now, and there doesn't seem to be any way to penetrate any of them. Basic historical facts and, as we see here, MATH have now become the subject of everyone's personal opinion. When there are no facts, there is no truth. When there is no truth, there are no lies. And then nothing matters. And it would certainly seem that we've reached that point.
Don't blame "Trump's America" because that sort of "I have a badge therefore you must do as I say even if what I am telling you to do violates your policies or is simply wrong" was going on during Obama's America just like it was happening in Bush's America before that, Clinton's America before that, and so on. There is a law on the books here in Texas which is supposed to apply only for police officers working in active school zones which says, in essence, "if a police officer tells you to do x then you must do x or be subject to misdemeanor arrest". The problem with this law is that there are no restrictions on it--the police officer can order you to do something illegal and you must comply or else be subject to arrest. I suppose you could comply and then face arrest for your illegal action which you were ordered to do, though....
re: the other cops standing around not getting involved
Police do close ranks with each other, even when they are closing ranks with someone who is clearly in the wrong. Those who don't are shunned for life, presuming they live through it. I read an interview someone did with Frank Serpico last year and even after all this time he cannot safely enter New York City because the police there still remember who he is and what he did, even if they were too young to be police officers at that time (recall that he exposed widespread police corruption).
Law enforcement officers never like to be told "no" and too many of them have that "you *will* do what I say without question" attitude. Our problem as citizens is that we cannot tell which officers are like that merely by looking at them. The other danger with non-compliance is that some large departments may still have the system they had in Chicago--they could arrest you, take you to the off-site detention facility, and disappear you. Since you didn't get booked into the jail there is no record of your arrest and if the arresting officer didn't call it in then no one even knows you got arrested.
It would be nice to think that the incident with the police and nurse was a one-off instance of a cop having a bad day. Unfortunately it's clear that not just his partner, but senior officers as well didn't see this as any big deal. It's only over a month later, in the face of public and political reaction to videos of the incident, that the police appear to have acknowledged that everyone is supposed to abide by the law. A criminal investigation has just been opened and the officer placed on administrative leave (though apparently still not arrested at this stage).
Obama was at least willing to call out some of this nonsense, whereas Trump is actively encouraging and emboldening it. You'll recall that one of the major scandals of Obama's early first term was when he said a group of cops acted "stupidly" when they arrested a Harvard professor who had simply locked himself out of his own house, because they thought he was breaking into it. And the right-wing media lost their shit over that statement. If you can't call cops stupid when they arrest someone (specifically because they are black) for attempting to gain entrance to their own property, then when are you allowed to call them stupid?? The answer is, clearly, never.
The problem is that cops no longer see drug dealing, murder, or rape as the major crimes in this country. The worst crime you can be guilty of in America in 2017 is disrespecting a police officer. It isn't illegal, but by god, cops are going to MAKE it illegal. Because a cop on the street is essentially a walking dictatorship. If you mouth off, or try to assert your rights, they will simply MAKE UP a reason to charge or arrest you for something, and you will have no recourse, because even if you go to court, 90% of the time, the judge will side with the cop. This is why cops are TERRIFIED of cell phone cameras, and many Republican state legislators have attempted to make it illegal to film police officers. They have been operating with total immunity from responsibility and consequences for decades, and the only thing that is changing that paradigm even a small bit is the fact that nearly everyone has a recording device in their pocket to document their abuses. The question is, are cops the law unto themselves, or are they tasked with enforcing it?? The answer right now is clearly that former. It is nearly impossible to convict a cop of anything even with overwhelming video and audio evidence. Ones that get fired simply move a few zip codes over and join another department. As was just mentioned, this detective was JUST placed on administrative leave, and that is only because it blew up on social media in the last 48 hours. Before this, he had simply been taking off the duty of getting blood samples. He should have been arrested for assault and fired within days.
And this is a prime example of why white Americans need to wake up and give a shit about the fact that this happens (and has been happening) to African-Americans on a daily basis for decades. Because eventually, it's going to be you too. And you won't have any recourse either. This nurse should sue the department for everything she can get, but even then, that won't solve the issue. It's not coming out of the cop's pocket, but the taxpayers. And isn't it funny how the same people who bitch about wasting taxpayer money are usually the first to defend cops who cost their local governments millions of dollars in settling misconduct cases. No, the only way you will fix this issue is if the cost of settling theses lawsuits comes directly out of police pension funds.
You would think that the local police department and the hospital would be on good terms. In fact, the reason this nurse was so adamant about refusing to provide the sample was because of an agreement that was signed off on by the local police department a year earlier. This detective (and his boss apparently) are so utterly incompetent at their job that they don't even know their own policies and procedures, or it may be that they just no longer care to follow any rules at all. If a cop can walk into a hospital, demand a blood draw from a patient without a warrant, and then attempt to arrest the nurse who refuses to take the blood sample, what is to stop any cop anywhere from walking into YOUR place of work and demanding sensitive files or information?? Do you provide such information to them and get fired, or do you get hauled off to a squad car??
Agreed, these guys can act like they have basically unchecked power. And they have too much leeway.
Not all cops are guys on power trips like that guy on the video. But there are a lot of them like that and they can get away with it almost always. Just look at the recent verdicts of cops shooting people and the guys were either not armed and doing nothing or walking away or just sitting in their car. The cops walk free again and again.
Institutional biases encourages that type of thinking both within departments and from external forces such as The President who just pardoned a guy who was an extreme abuser of police powers going so far as to kill several people without consequence other than civil payments.
By the way, the Jeff Sessions DOJ is going to have another trial against the protestor who could not help but laugh when someone said with a straight face that Sessions had a history of “treating all Americans equally under the law.”
The real crime is disrespecting law enforcement and we are 9 months into it on this with the lady potentially facing time behind bars
What's to be done? The solution is not to moved even more towards a police state and give them more totally unchecked power that Trump advocates. Not to mention giving them even more lethal military grade weapons. Common sense says that's not the answer here.
If you dig deeper, the story is potentially even worse. The person in the hospital they wanted the blood sample from was the VICTIM (by way of a traffic collision) of a target of a high-speed pursuit the police were engaged in. It's being speculated among many people that they wanted the blood of the unconscious patient so they could potentially find something in his system to absolve the police of blame for a dangerous chase they shouldn't have even been engaged in. The reason he was so pissed is that the blood sample itself was a likely avenue for a cover-up being shut down.
Since the nurse hasn't pressed charges against the officer, he can not be arrested.
That didn't sound right to me as in the UK criminal charges are brought by the state and not the individual. A bit of Googling confirmed that's the same in the US, i.e. a person can absolutely be arrested and charged irrespective of whether a victim wishes to 'press charges'. In some types of cases, e.g. domestic violence, that situation is not at all unusual. In other types of cases it would be unusual as without willing testimony from a victim the prospects for conviction may be poor. However, that's not the case here - there are multiple witnesses and very clear video evidence.
Since the nurse hasn't pressed charges against the officer, he can not be arrested.
That didn't sound right to me as in the UK criminal charges are brought by the state and not the individual. A bit of Googling confirmed that's the same in the US, i.e. a person can absolutely be arrested and charged irrespective of whether a victim wishes to 'press charges'. In some types of cases, e.g. domestic violence, that situation is not at all unusual. In other types of cases it would be unusual as without willing testimony from a victim the prospects for conviction may be poor. However, that's not the case here - there are multiple witnesses and very clear video evidence.
In Detroit they're now making it illegal for police to engage in high-speed chases with perps who haven't commited a felony. That's due to a cop who tasered a 15 year old kid trying to evade a police pursuit on an ATV. The kid died as a result of the crash and Jeffery Feiger has taken the case. The City is likely to lose millions of dollars as a result and it's not like Detroit is swimming in excess cash. Things are slowly changing...
Comments
I totally agree with your right to researching and posting the data, I implore you in the future to use common sense. That trumps (see what I did there) any and all data.
To say that an officers job is less dangerous than X. It's because of training and following that training to the letter is why the fatality numbers are lower. Bouncers and construction workers die due to misfortune or unfortunate events. Construction deaths are based off of insufficient training and cheap labor. Bouncers deaths come from the mixture of alcohol and testosterone. Officer's training is based on misfortune, unfortunate events, alcohol and testosterone.
I hope I haven't offended anyone but I do have a swift an assertive reaction to bullshit and will call it out.
Whats that old saying again? Opinions are like_______. Unfortunately in this day and age there are a lot of opinions walking around.
That's a false statement if I ever saw one. So called "common sense" is nothing but excuse for intelectual laziness and usage of comfortable simplifications. There is no intelectual merit in common sense.
Having said the above as a general point, I appreciate that you have made some specific points in your post as well. I agree that the level of training for police will, on average, be significantly greater than that for a construction worker - an introductory policing course will be around 800 hours in the US, although a significant element of that will relate to things unconnected with safety, e.g. understanding the law and report writing.
In addition to the lack of training you refer to there are other problems in the construction industry that affect safety. For instance employers may provide inadequate equipment, while many construction workers are paid on a piece work basis and therefore have a financial incentive to ignore safety requirements which slow work down.
Nevertheless, while I agree there are issues that should be explored further, I still believe you need to follow the data. Even if training has helped reduce police fatalities the point remains that the level of actual deaths and serious injuries is far below the level most people believe, i.e. public impressions don't currently reflect reality. That's not a good basis for decision making.
I recall the President of the United States at a recent rally in Staten Island calling for cops to be tougher with suspects. It's not like they needed any encouragement in that regard. Now they are also roughing up nurses who are simply protecting unconscious patients from illegal blood draws. Christ. I think it's long past time this country needs to come to grips with the fact that it's police forces are FILLED with people who are wholly unqualified from a temperamental standpoint to do the job without breaking the law themselves.
They arrested her in that hazardous "We're above the law, we are the law!" kind of way but later released her without charge. (oopsie).
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2017/09/01/utah-police-arrest-nurse-who-refused-draw-blood-unconscious-patient/625856001/
Get that cop a bazooka and a tank right? Law and Order. /s
The amazing thing about common sense is that you either have it, or you don't.
False, obviously.
Everybody has common sense. Everybody has set of unchecked, unchallenged beliefs, that are comfortable to follow. Some just decide to do some intelectual work, others stay on "I believe it and it seems reasonable, therefore it's true!" level.
There was pretty famous experiment, where people were presented with a riddle:
"there is quiet, tidy man that likes order. Is he more likely to be librarian, or farmer?". Well, *common sense* is to say "librarian", but the answer is obviously farmer, because there are more farmers than librarians in society. But our brain in not wired to think in statistics, but in causal ways, so that seems to be counterintuitive. If anyone interested, here's a link: https://www.russellsage.org/news/behavioral-economics-puzzles-kahneman-and-tverskys-experiments.
I don't think I bash Trump or the Police or the MAN (I'm not even sure if you mean gender or not) *that* much.
If I could, I would spend rest of my life bashing YA fiction or prequel trilogy of SW, but I don't think there is any serious data about that.
But seriously - I'm not sure whatcha mean.
It's entirely possible my original post about this that I made on Daily Kos a few years ago will come up in a Google search on this topic (as I saw it last night). You can read the thread, as many people made the exact same argument you are: that even though I was presenting raw statistical data, I was being disingenuous because OF COURSE everyone knows that cops have a more dangerous job than these other professions. That was the crux of the argument. That they have a special job that doesn't apply to normal analysis. I had a professional statistician in the thread backing up my post at the time.
I have been told that I am a racist and a bigot, only in this forum because my views on certain current events do not match the same as 4 or 5 other forum users.
Again, if someone believes that, being a bouncer is more dangerous of a profession than being a peace officer, they should seek professional help. I mean that in the most caring, compassionate and sincere way.
Have a happy and safe long weekend everyone. I hope to read more exiting and riveting Trump bashing after labor day. Remember not to wear white.
This isn't all that dissimilar to what we were talking about a day ago, in which 30% of Republicans believe Barack Obama was President during Katrina. Whatever has caused it, there are now between 2-4 different realities floating around in the public right now, and there doesn't seem to be any way to penetrate any of them. Basic historical facts and, as we see here, MATH have now become the subject of everyone's personal opinion. When there are no facts, there is no truth. When there is no truth, there are no lies. And then nothing matters. And it would certainly seem that we've reached that point.
Don't blame "Trump's America" because that sort of "I have a badge therefore you must do as I say even if what I am telling you to do violates your policies or is simply wrong" was going on during Obama's America just like it was happening in Bush's America before that, Clinton's America before that, and so on. There is a law on the books here in Texas which is supposed to apply only for police officers working in active school zones which says, in essence, "if a police officer tells you to do x then you must do x or be subject to misdemeanor arrest". The problem with this law is that there are no restrictions on it--the police officer can order you to do something illegal and you must comply or else be subject to arrest. I suppose you could comply and then face arrest for your illegal action which you were ordered to do, though....
re: the other cops standing around not getting involved
Police do close ranks with each other, even when they are closing ranks with someone who is clearly in the wrong. Those who don't are shunned for life, presuming they live through it. I read an interview someone did with Frank Serpico last year and even after all this time he cannot safely enter New York City because the police there still remember who he is and what he did, even if they were too young to be police officers at that time (recall that he exposed widespread police corruption).
Law enforcement officers never like to be told "no" and too many of them have that "you *will* do what I say without question" attitude. Our problem as citizens is that we cannot tell which officers are like that merely by looking at them. The other danger with non-compliance is that some large departments may still have the system they had in Chicago--they could arrest you, take you to the off-site detention facility, and disappear you. Since you didn't get booked into the jail there is no record of your arrest and if the arresting officer didn't call it in then no one even knows you got arrested.
The problem is that cops no longer see drug dealing, murder, or rape as the major crimes in this country. The worst crime you can be guilty of in America in 2017 is disrespecting a police officer. It isn't illegal, but by god, cops are going to MAKE it illegal. Because a cop on the street is essentially a walking dictatorship. If you mouth off, or try to assert your rights, they will simply MAKE UP a reason to charge or arrest you for something, and you will have no recourse, because even if you go to court, 90% of the time, the judge will side with the cop. This is why cops are TERRIFIED of cell phone cameras, and many Republican state legislators have attempted to make it illegal to film police officers. They have been operating with total immunity from responsibility and consequences for decades, and the only thing that is changing that paradigm even a small bit is the fact that nearly everyone has a recording device in their pocket to document their abuses. The question is, are cops the law unto themselves, or are they tasked with enforcing it?? The answer right now is clearly that former. It is nearly impossible to convict a cop of anything even with overwhelming video and audio evidence. Ones that get fired simply move a few zip codes over and join another department. As was just mentioned, this detective was JUST placed on administrative leave, and that is only because it blew up on social media in the last 48 hours. Before this, he had simply been taking off the duty of getting blood samples. He should have been arrested for assault and fired within days.
And this is a prime example of why white Americans need to wake up and give a shit about the fact that this happens (and has been happening) to African-Americans on a daily basis for decades. Because eventually, it's going to be you too. And you won't have any recourse either. This nurse should sue the department for everything she can get, but even then, that won't solve the issue. It's not coming out of the cop's pocket, but the taxpayers. And isn't it funny how the same people who bitch about wasting taxpayer money are usually the first to defend cops who cost their local governments millions of dollars in settling misconduct cases. No, the only way you will fix this issue is if the cost of settling theses lawsuits comes directly out of police pension funds.
You would think that the local police department and the hospital would be on good terms. In fact, the reason this nurse was so adamant about refusing to provide the sample was because of an agreement that was signed off on by the local police department a year earlier. This detective (and his boss apparently) are so utterly incompetent at their job that they don't even know their own policies and procedures, or it may be that they just no longer care to follow any rules at all. If a cop can walk into a hospital, demand a blood draw from a patient without a warrant, and then attempt to arrest the nurse who refuses to take the blood sample, what is to stop any cop anywhere from walking into YOUR place of work and demanding sensitive files or information?? Do you provide such information to them and get fired, or do you get hauled off to a squad car??
Not all cops are guys on power trips like that guy on the video. But there are a lot of them like that and they can get away with it almost always. Just look at the recent verdicts of cops shooting people and the guys were either not armed and doing nothing or walking away or just sitting in their car. The cops walk free again and again.
Institutional biases encourages that type of thinking both within departments and from external forces such as The President who just pardoned a guy who was an extreme abuser of police powers going so far as to kill several people without consequence other than civil payments.
By the way, the Jeff Sessions DOJ is going to have another trial against the protestor who could not help but laugh when someone said with a straight face that Sessions had a history of “treating all Americans equally under the law.”
The real crime is disrespecting law enforcement and we are 9 months into it on this with the lady potentially facing time behind bars
What's to be done? The solution is not to moved even more towards a police state and give them more totally unchecked power that Trump advocates. Not to mention giving them even more lethal military grade weapons. Common sense says that's not the answer here.
It will be amusing to see what internals comes up with however since the nurse is in a wait and see stance.