Many “bobbies” in the UK don’t carry a gun. They have a nightstick and a whistle (radio) as has been the way since the founding of modern policing in the early 1800’s London.
If American “cops” weren’t armed like the military they might behave a little differently. There is no reason for 90% of American police to carry any firearm.
bb
July 14, 2015 2:08 pm
Most of the crime especially violent crime is committed by the different minority groups in this country. The police response in kind.That’s the reason . An example is gun violence which is mostly committed by young black males. If it wasn’t for them there would be very little gun violence in this country. Gun violence is black violence.
Russia Is Strong
July 14, 2015 3:11 pm
“Why?”
Simple! Complete & utter lack of civilian oversight over Amerikan police departments, coupled with extremely lax laws for punishing abusive police. For example, how many Americunts are aware of the fact that cops in the USSA have their OWN “Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights”?
Probably about 3.
So there you have it: No outside oversight + special laws that grant cops special privileges = 59 fatal police shootings every 24 days.
YES THEY CAN!!!
IndenturedServant
July 14, 2015 4:02 pm
Our cops should be armed with a two shot Derringer and one barrel should contain a blank. That would cause cops to enter every situation using their brain but then you’d have to hire cops with actual brains.
Actually, cops should be forced to WALK 90% of their beat every day and get to know the residents and the business owners. These people know far more about their neighborhoods and the problems therein than ANY cop would learn in 20 years of driving his patrol car through same neighborhood.
There is much angst and consternation against prosecutors and grand juries who refuse to bring charges against police officers, even when incontrovertible evidence is presented. Even with incontrovertible audio and video evidence, prosecutors are loath to prosecute rogue law enforcement personnel.
Let’s examine the reasons why it is so difficult to prosecute thug cops:
Most prosecutors are former police officers or have extensive dealings with police departments and have ongoing relationships with police departments in their respective jurisdictions. They are friendly with the judges in their jurisdictions, as well. This, along with “absolute immunity” makes it easy for them to “cover up” police abuses and behavior. Prosecutors cannot be sued for malfeasance…it takes a judge (who prosecutors are friendly with) to bring charges on a rogue prosecutor (which almost never happens).
In addition, prosecutors guide the actions of grand juries. Prosecutors are not required to introduce any evidence to grand juries, (can and do) easily “whitewash” the actions of rogue cops. On the other hand, prosecutors can (and often do) go after honest citizens who seek justice outside official channels…prosecutors have ultimate power and are not afraid to use it…their immunity sees to that.
Another aspect to a grand jury’s inability to prosecute bad cops is the fear of retribution…cops drive around all day, have nothing but time, have access to various databases, and can easily get the names and addresses of grand jurors…this, in itself can be a powerful deterrent against grand jurors who “want to do the right thing” and prosecute bad cops. There are many cases of cops parking in front of grand jurors’ residences, following them around, and threaten to issue citations to them, in order to “convince” them to “make the right decision”…the “thin blue line” at its worst…
The whole system has to change.
Eliminate absolute and qualified immunity for all public officials. The fear of personal lawsuits would be a powerful deterrent against abuses of the public.
Any funds disbursed to civilians as a result of official misconduct must be taken from the police pension funds–NOT from the taxpayers.
Grand juries must be superior to the prosecutor; ALL evidence must be presented to grand jurors. Failure to do so must be considered a felony and subject prosecutors to prosecution themselves.
No police agency can be allowed to investigate itself. Internal affairs departments must be restricted to minor in-house investigations of behavior between cops. All investigations must be handled by outside agencies, preferably at the state level.
Civilian police review boards must be free of police influence. Members of civilian review boards must have NO ties to police departments. Relatives of police would be prohibited from serving…Recently, the “supreme court” threw police another “bone”. The court ruled that police are not responsible for their actions if they are “ignorant of the law”…now, let’s get this straight–honest citizens cannot use “ignorance of the law” as an excuse, but cops can??
Revolution is sorely needed…..
anarchyst
July 14, 2015 7:27 pm
Here are “police” practices that deserve to be exposed:
#1. During a traffic stop, the police officer will touch the back of your car. The reason for this “touch” is that, quite often, the police officer will have a small quantity of narcotics (marijuana or cocaine) on him (in his hand) that he will rub on the car in order to help “justify a search”. When the dog is brought in, it will react to “cues” from its handler as well as the drug residue on the vehicle and help “justify a search”. This tactic is mostly used against young people. Drugs can also be “planted” on a “suspect”.
The “touch” used to be a way for police officers to “prove” that they had an interaction with a citizen, but no more . . .
#2. Most (if not all) cops possess a “throwdown” weapon. This “helper” is obtained from a criminal who is then “let go” without his weapon and is always used to justify a questionable police situation and to “sanitize” a “crime scene to absolve police on the scene of criminal police behavior.
#3. If you are in the back of a police car, LIE DOWN on the seat. Police use the concept of “screening” to abuse their unwilling “passenger”. This involves, driving at high rates of speed, violent turns and other antics to get the passenger to “hit the screen” separating the front from the back with his face. Hence the act of “screening”.
#4. If you are being handcuffed, quite often the police officer will wrench you arm behind you, forcing you to “turn around”. The officer will then add a charge of “assault” to whatever other charges they concoct against you (just for being forced to turn around). They “pile on” charges, hoping you will plead guilty to at least one.
Remember–NEVER CONSENT TO SEARCH . . . You must be polite, but firm in your refusal. You can state that “you NEVER consent to searches” as well as using these “magic” words–“am I free to go?” The police officer MUST answer your question . . . If you are being detained and an illegal search takes place, you have legal recourse.
Remember–police are not your friends . . .
That being said, not all “law enforcement” is criminal, but the “thin blue line” that they so jealously guard (and “look the other way” when rogue cops abuse their authority) does much to taint ALL “law enforcement” with having ulterior motives.
Overthecliff
July 15, 2015 11:53 am
I would rather live in USA. There are still some rights here. Tenuous? Yes, but not gone completely. Don’t know how long it will last.
llpoh
July 15, 2015 8:19 pm
The difference is that almost no one in the UK owns a gun, so UK cops generally do not fear being shot.
In the US, everyone owns a gun, and certain demographics are dangerous and armed, and cops are cowards. So they shoot first and ask questions later.
llpoh
July 15, 2015 8:23 pm
Seriously, this is not rocket science. The US has almost 90 guns per 100 citizens, while the UK has under 7. Guess which cops are gonna be shitting themselves?
Iska Waran
July 15, 2015 9:16 pm
Llpoh, true, but there are lots of guns in South Dakota and I’d bet cops don’t shoot many people there, because people don’t shoot many cops there. It’s what bb said – which I thought I’d said, too.
llpoh
July 15, 2015 9:27 pm
Iska – London is full of ferals of every skin tone. If they were as well armed as those in the US, you would see them getting shot (and doing a lot of shooting), there is no doubt whatsoever.
Iska Waran
July 15, 2015 9:31 pm
True. It’s the combination of demographics and access to guns. And, of course, a lot of cops are raging lunatics with little chance of being prosecuted for brutality.
Demographics
Many “bobbies” in the UK don’t carry a gun. They have a nightstick and a whistle (radio) as has been the way since the founding of modern policing in the early 1800’s London.
If American “cops” weren’t armed like the military they might behave a little differently. There is no reason for 90% of American police to carry any firearm.
Most of the crime especially violent crime is committed by the different minority groups in this country. The police response in kind.That’s the reason . An example is gun violence which is mostly committed by young black males. If it wasn’t for them there would be very little gun violence in this country. Gun violence is black violence.
“Why?”
Simple! Complete & utter lack of civilian oversight over Amerikan police departments, coupled with extremely lax laws for punishing abusive police. For example, how many Americunts are aware of the fact that cops in the USSA have their OWN “Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights”?
Probably about 3.
So there you have it: No outside oversight + special laws that grant cops special privileges = 59 fatal police shootings every 24 days.
YES THEY CAN!!!
Our cops should be armed with a two shot Derringer and one barrel should contain a blank. That would cause cops to enter every situation using their brain but then you’d have to hire cops with actual brains.
Actually, cops should be forced to WALK 90% of their beat every day and get to know the residents and the business owners. These people know far more about their neighborhoods and the problems therein than ANY cop would learn in 20 years of driving his patrol car through same neighborhood.
Then there is Iceland . . . .
There is much angst and consternation against prosecutors and grand juries who refuse to bring charges against police officers, even when incontrovertible evidence is presented. Even with incontrovertible audio and video evidence, prosecutors are loath to prosecute rogue law enforcement personnel.
Let’s examine the reasons why it is so difficult to prosecute thug cops:
Most prosecutors are former police officers or have extensive dealings with police departments and have ongoing relationships with police departments in their respective jurisdictions. They are friendly with the judges in their jurisdictions, as well. This, along with “absolute immunity” makes it easy for them to “cover up” police abuses and behavior. Prosecutors cannot be sued for malfeasance…it takes a judge (who prosecutors are friendly with) to bring charges on a rogue prosecutor (which almost never happens).
In addition, prosecutors guide the actions of grand juries. Prosecutors are not required to introduce any evidence to grand juries, (can and do) easily “whitewash” the actions of rogue cops. On the other hand, prosecutors can (and often do) go after honest citizens who seek justice outside official channels…prosecutors have ultimate power and are not afraid to use it…their immunity sees to that.
Another aspect to a grand jury’s inability to prosecute bad cops is the fear of retribution…cops drive around all day, have nothing but time, have access to various databases, and can easily get the names and addresses of grand jurors…this, in itself can be a powerful deterrent against grand jurors who “want to do the right thing” and prosecute bad cops. There are many cases of cops parking in front of grand jurors’ residences, following them around, and threaten to issue citations to them, in order to “convince” them to “make the right decision”…the “thin blue line” at its worst…
The whole system has to change.
Eliminate absolute and qualified immunity for all public officials. The fear of personal lawsuits would be a powerful deterrent against abuses of the public.
Any funds disbursed to civilians as a result of official misconduct must be taken from the police pension funds–NOT from the taxpayers.
Grand juries must be superior to the prosecutor; ALL evidence must be presented to grand jurors. Failure to do so must be considered a felony and subject prosecutors to prosecution themselves.
No police agency can be allowed to investigate itself. Internal affairs departments must be restricted to minor in-house investigations of behavior between cops. All investigations must be handled by outside agencies, preferably at the state level.
Civilian police review boards must be free of police influence. Members of civilian review boards must have NO ties to police departments. Relatives of police would be prohibited from serving…Recently, the “supreme court” threw police another “bone”. The court ruled that police are not responsible for their actions if they are “ignorant of the law”…now, let’s get this straight–honest citizens cannot use “ignorance of the law” as an excuse, but cops can??
Revolution is sorely needed…..
Here are “police” practices that deserve to be exposed:
#1. During a traffic stop, the police officer will touch the back of your car. The reason for this “touch” is that, quite often, the police officer will have a small quantity of narcotics (marijuana or cocaine) on him (in his hand) that he will rub on the car in order to help “justify a search”. When the dog is brought in, it will react to “cues” from its handler as well as the drug residue on the vehicle and help “justify a search”. This tactic is mostly used against young people. Drugs can also be “planted” on a “suspect”.
The “touch” used to be a way for police officers to “prove” that they had an interaction with a citizen, but no more . . .
#2. Most (if not all) cops possess a “throwdown” weapon. This “helper” is obtained from a criminal who is then “let go” without his weapon and is always used to justify a questionable police situation and to “sanitize” a “crime scene to absolve police on the scene of criminal police behavior.
#3. If you are in the back of a police car, LIE DOWN on the seat. Police use the concept of “screening” to abuse their unwilling “passenger”. This involves, driving at high rates of speed, violent turns and other antics to get the passenger to “hit the screen” separating the front from the back with his face. Hence the act of “screening”.
#4. If you are being handcuffed, quite often the police officer will wrench you arm behind you, forcing you to “turn around”. The officer will then add a charge of “assault” to whatever other charges they concoct against you (just for being forced to turn around). They “pile on” charges, hoping you will plead guilty to at least one.
Remember–NEVER CONSENT TO SEARCH . . . You must be polite, but firm in your refusal. You can state that “you NEVER consent to searches” as well as using these “magic” words–“am I free to go?” The police officer MUST answer your question . . . If you are being detained and an illegal search takes place, you have legal recourse.
Remember–police are not your friends . . .
That being said, not all “law enforcement” is criminal, but the “thin blue line” that they so jealously guard (and “look the other way” when rogue cops abuse their authority) does much to taint ALL “law enforcement” with having ulterior motives.
I would rather live in USA. There are still some rights here. Tenuous? Yes, but not gone completely. Don’t know how long it will last.
The difference is that almost no one in the UK owns a gun, so UK cops generally do not fear being shot.
In the US, everyone owns a gun, and certain demographics are dangerous and armed, and cops are cowards. So they shoot first and ask questions later.
Seriously, this is not rocket science. The US has almost 90 guns per 100 citizens, while the UK has under 7. Guess which cops are gonna be shitting themselves?
Llpoh, true, but there are lots of guns in South Dakota and I’d bet cops don’t shoot many people there, because people don’t shoot many cops there. It’s what bb said – which I thought I’d said, too.
Iska – London is full of ferals of every skin tone. If they were as well armed as those in the US, you would see them getting shot (and doing a lot of shooting), there is no doubt whatsoever.
True. It’s the combination of demographics and access to guns. And, of course, a lot of cops are raging lunatics with little chance of being prosecuted for brutality.