Quote: (07-04-2013 02:12 PM)Kingsley Davis Wrote:
[...]
![[Image: 3v3xju.jpg]](http://i.qkme.me/3v3xju.jpg)
now Anonymous has trgeted the HPD
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2013/07/0...oting-dog/
Man Films Police, Then Police Kill His Dog
now Anonymous has trgeted the HPD
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2013/07/0...oting-dog/
Quote: (07-08-2013 04:11 PM)GameTheory Wrote:
now Anonymous has trgeted the HPD
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2013/07/0...oting-dog/
Again, what happened to all the guys on this thread saying internet outrage was useless?
I think the cops are beginning to learn that in this new era we live in it's something to take very seriously indeed.
Beyond All Seas
"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe.
To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes
frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Kipling
"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe.
To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes
frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Kipling
Quote: (07-08-2013 11:35 PM)Beyond Borders Wrote:
Quote: (07-08-2013 04:11 PM)GameTheory Wrote:
now Anonymous has trgeted the HPD
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2013/07/0...oting-dog/
Again, what happened to all the guys on this thread saying internet outrage was useless?
I think the cops are beginning to learn that in this new era we live in it's something to take very seriously indeed.
Wishful thinking.
For real change to happen, cops will have to get fired or even get jail time for offenses like these. Until that starts happening on a systematic level, you won't see any decline in incidents like these.
Vigilante justice is too sporadic and feeble to effect any real change, when it comes to the government and the cops. It's not like a private business where customers will be horrified and stop giving them money. Hawthorne PD is still going to get money from Hawthorne taxpayers next year.
Quote: (07-09-2013 12:03 AM)basilransom Wrote:
Quote: (07-08-2013 11:35 PM)Beyond Borders Wrote:
Quote: (07-08-2013 04:11 PM)GameTheory Wrote:
now Anonymous has trgeted the HPD
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2013/07/0...oting-dog/
Again, what happened to all the guys on this thread saying internet outrage was useless?
I think the cops are beginning to learn that in this new era we live in it's something to take very seriously indeed.
Wishful thinking.
For real change to happen, cops will have to get fired or even get jail time for offenses like these. Until that starts happening on a systematic level, you won't see any decline in incidents like these.
Vigilante justice is too sporadic and feeble to effect any real change, when it comes to the government and the cops. It's not like a private business where customers will be horrified and stop giving them money. Hawthorne PD is still going to get money from Hawthorne taxpayers next year.
Wishful thinking? I can understand you having a difference of opinion but you seem quite confident in it to brush the idea off so boldly. Perhaps a bit of humility is in order...
In any case, I beg to differ. There are instances all over the country where similar scenarios have unfolded; in many, local outrage (not even nationwide) has forced systematic changes at least at the local level, often even leading to programs where police officers are trained in how to deal with dogs (much like postal workers are everywhere already).
Does that change the entire mentality and corrupt system the police operate under? Of course not. But every time the public steps up to check the police is a step in the right direction and undermines the military approach they've developed.
Look, I understand cynicism, but it's this whole idea that we should give up completely even to the point of not grumbling amongst ourselves or sharing stories about blatant abuse of power (because it doesn't change anything) that really gets me.
Discouraging conversation on the grounds that it won't change anything is horribly self-defeatist in my opinion. People who think like that lock themselves into a vicious circle and that's their choice, but insisting everyone else join them in that worldview is highly suggestive that they're just emotionally invested in their own beliefs, especially when the power of the masses is becoming such a clear part of everyday life.
Speaking of the power of the masses, it was greatly feared by the writers of the constitution. Just as many checks and balances were put in place to restrict the tyranny of the majority as were put in place to restrict the tyranny of the minority.
And in those days the masses didn't have the type of cumulative power technology lends them today either.
Of course, the tyranny of the masses has just as much potential for abuse, if not more, but when one gets too far out of whack it often takes the other to knock it off its roost, if only one small step at a time.
Beyond All Seas
"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe.
To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes
frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Kipling
"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe.
To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes
frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Kipling
I watched the video and it seems like a tragedy where both sides were wrong, but the cops are professionals so they are more in the wrong. I am usually sympathetic to the cops but the point where they were about to leave, saw the guy filming and then walked over to him for no reason was unprofessional.
He had his dog on a leash, he wasn't harassing anyone, yelling at anyone, he didn't have an open bottle of beer-- he didn't appear to be doing ANYTHING illegal or even rude to anyone. There seemed to be NO reasonable suspicion to base rousting him on.
But then when they told him to put his dog in his car, he didn't put his dog where he the dog was contained-- his fault.
The cops were in a quandary then. They were arresting him. probably unfairly, but the dog was loose--what were they going to do with it?
They should be paying some money to him for hassling him when he wasn't doing anything illegal and to let him buy a new dog.
Hopefully, as WE keep paying out for this harassment of video tapers, things will be clarified. It's my understanding you should be allowed to film the cops. They're not supposed to be doing anything wrong right? It would be better if it is clear one way or the other what circumstances it is legal under, and educate the cops on this.
IN this case, police awareness that he was recording legally would have prevented the whole unfortunate altercation from happening.
He had his dog on a leash, he wasn't harassing anyone, yelling at anyone, he didn't have an open bottle of beer-- he didn't appear to be doing ANYTHING illegal or even rude to anyone. There seemed to be NO reasonable suspicion to base rousting him on.
But then when they told him to put his dog in his car, he didn't put his dog where he the dog was contained-- his fault.
The cops were in a quandary then. They were arresting him. probably unfairly, but the dog was loose--what were they going to do with it?
They should be paying some money to him for hassling him when he wasn't doing anything illegal and to let him buy a new dog.
Hopefully, as WE keep paying out for this harassment of video tapers, things will be clarified. It's my understanding you should be allowed to film the cops. They're not supposed to be doing anything wrong right? It would be better if it is clear one way or the other what circumstances it is legal under, and educate the cops on this.
IN this case, police awareness that he was recording legally would have prevented the whole unfortunate altercation from happening.
^ pretty much feel the same way.
Honestly, I don't want to live in a country where the police shoots first and asks questions (if at all) later. The guy wasn't being arrested, he wasn't sought after, he was being detained, probably for identification. Of course he's a complete idiot. But did they have to cuff him? Why not talk to him first, tell him to secure the dog. Their guns are already out after all. When his dog approached they at least could have let go of him, let him walk up to his dog and assure the dog that he wasn't being assaulted. Any dog that has a sense of protection for its master will react like that when 3 men surround the dog owner, especially when they turn the black guy around and he's not visible to the dog anymore. You will notice that's when the dog gets really anxious and aggressive. Simply turning him around for the dog to see him would have prevented this whole incident.
Approaching the dog instead of backing off, then discharging a firearm, multiple times when the bullets can indeed ricochets and injure any bystander, including children, was unprofessional, arguably unnecessary and that particular police officer is not fit for his job.
Legal, legitimate, reasonable or not, whatever, these are sad times when police are shooting people and animals in the street in broad daylight. That's what is wrong here. Not, let's do anything to protect life and de-escalate a situation, rather just "you fuck with us and we'll shoot your dog. Treat yourself". What does an incident like this say about the attitude of the police force involved?
edit: the PR by the police department is terrible too. I just saw the police chief saying the department regrets the video deeply. Well, okay, so if it hadn't been filmed you wouldn't regret it? Don't people let others read their speeches before they give them? Sheesh. Supposedly all the officers involved were dog lovers and so on. Who approaches a scared dog in an aggressive posture holding a gun? This wans't a confined space. The dog was not a threat to public, just the officers. All they had to do was back off and let the guy talk to his dog.
Apparently this police particular force has decided that the best way to protect the public is to make the public afraid of them so they can go about their work of protecting the public without having to engage the public.
Honestly, I don't want to live in a country where the police shoots first and asks questions (if at all) later. The guy wasn't being arrested, he wasn't sought after, he was being detained, probably for identification. Of course he's a complete idiot. But did they have to cuff him? Why not talk to him first, tell him to secure the dog. Their guns are already out after all. When his dog approached they at least could have let go of him, let him walk up to his dog and assure the dog that he wasn't being assaulted. Any dog that has a sense of protection for its master will react like that when 3 men surround the dog owner, especially when they turn the black guy around and he's not visible to the dog anymore. You will notice that's when the dog gets really anxious and aggressive. Simply turning him around for the dog to see him would have prevented this whole incident.
Approaching the dog instead of backing off, then discharging a firearm, multiple times when the bullets can indeed ricochets and injure any bystander, including children, was unprofessional, arguably unnecessary and that particular police officer is not fit for his job.
Legal, legitimate, reasonable or not, whatever, these are sad times when police are shooting people and animals in the street in broad daylight. That's what is wrong here. Not, let's do anything to protect life and de-escalate a situation, rather just "you fuck with us and we'll shoot your dog. Treat yourself". What does an incident like this say about the attitude of the police force involved?
edit: the PR by the police department is terrible too. I just saw the police chief saying the department regrets the video deeply. Well, okay, so if it hadn't been filmed you wouldn't regret it? Don't people let others read their speeches before they give them? Sheesh. Supposedly all the officers involved were dog lovers and so on. Who approaches a scared dog in an aggressive posture holding a gun? This wans't a confined space. The dog was not a threat to public, just the officers. All they had to do was back off and let the guy talk to his dog.
Apparently this police particular force has decided that the best way to protect the public is to make the public afraid of them so they can go about their work of protecting the public without having to engage the public.
Beyond Borders, you misunderstood my comment. I was referring to the Anonymous threat; a hacking attack is just going to make the cops look more like the good guys. I fully encourage discussion and engagement with such issues. But people who think giving cops a doggie training class is going to help things are severely deluded. That's akin to treating one of a thousand negative symptoms, instead of the root cause of the disease.
See Radley Balko's article in Salon, about the militarization of police.
See Radley Balko's article in Salon, about the militarization of police.
Quote: (07-09-2013 12:32 PM)basilransom Wrote:
Beyond Borders, you misunderstood my comment. I was referring to the Anonymous threat; a hacking attack is just going to make the cops look more like the good guys. I fully encourage discussion and engagement with such issues. But people who think giving cops a doggie training class is going to help things are severely deluded. That's akin to treating one of a thousand negative symptoms, instead of the root cause of the disease.
See Radley Balko's article in Salon, about the militarization of police.
Yeah, I'm well aware of that article.
Anyhow, okay, I got you. The post I initially made was in reference to something discussed in the thread earlier, when people had popped in to imply that us even bitching about it was akin to mental masturbation, thus, in my eyes, discouraging the discussion at all. I assumed when you replied to said post that you were injecting yourself into that particular conversation and supporting the earlier sentiment.
That's why I laid out the argument that I did. So yes, it looks like I misunderstood.
I still think Anonymous and other forms of outrage, including the demand for "doggie training," as you put it, have their place in the big scheme of things, even when the changes they inspire are small. Of course we need a lot more to happen but these things are a step in the right direction - movements that inspire cultural change start small and then snowball, and these two signs of discontent are also mere symptoms of something much larger in the works.
As I see it, anyhow.
Beyond All Seas
"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe.
To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes
frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Kipling
"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe.
To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes
frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Kipling
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)