Why do people say ACAB (All Cops Are Bastards)?

[Defenestration]

If being a cop is inherently a corrupt position, what alternative solution is there to do? Not have cops and let the streets turn to unnecessary chaos? There are indeed corrupt cops out there but to say that ALL of them are corrupt?

[Morkonan]

Publicado originalmente por Tom Macdonald:

Publicado originalmente por Morkonan:

My example wasn't "bad." Why should I say it was? It's just a general example and I am qualifying it with the fact that I'm not an attorney nor do I know the laws of all the States in the US or other countries.

its a simple answer. they went into the wrong house and thus have opened a door to lawsuit. its gonna be impossible to claim they saw him go in when they can't find him.

They made a mistake while carrying out their lawful duties. Are they civilly liable? A court would decide that. Criminally liable? That depends in a large part on intent and proving that they knew they didn't have enough evidence to enter that house. And, with qualified immunity removed as you suggested be done, and as I understand the principle, they would have then been breaking the law by unlawfully entering that home by force.

The point being is that we don't have to break something in order to fix it. Removing qualified immunity "breaks" law-enforcement in ways that society would not like.

And, if you could sue the Fire Department for breaking into your house to put out a fire, see how fast your house-fire gets put out, next time...


PS: Gotta go do something, will maybe check back tonight. There's no antagonism, here. I'm just trying to explain that sometimes what is a very emotionally driven idea may not actually be a good idea, that's all.

[Morkonan]

Publicado originalmente por Zeno:

Well yeah, but there is also cops who have a blue line on their U.S flag. Which is a sign of the total institution being at work and cops seeing themselves as a separate body of the general population. Which is usually a very bad thing and ends up badly, which we could also see with the BLM protests and how cops often acted.

I have never seen a police officer deface the US flag.

I have seen, however, the Blue Line on Black Background that symbolized officers that have fallen in the line of duty, though, and is also sometimes used by officer's friends families to show solidarity with them. (And, by others using it as a bumper-sticker to try to influence cops not to give them traffic tickets.)

Officers will band their shield/badge, too, in mourning and solidarity if an officer has died or fallen in the line of duty.

[Sir Seanicus, Esq.]

Publicado originalmente por Morkonan:

Publicado originalmente por Sir Seanicus, Esq.:

Then why aren't good cops stopping the bad cops?

When did that happen?

Why didn't you stop the last murderer before they murdered someone?


Cops don't show up when good things are happening.


Remember that. And, also know what most of the time when they are involved in situations that represent the sorts of risks people are talking about, things are progressing rapidly from bad to worse. There is not enough time to have a meeting about something and the officer's state of mind can't be evaluated on-scene by a therapist before they take action or believe they must take action in order to perform their duties.

That includes those they work with.

So, let's say a cop is alone and calls for assistance. Another cop arrives to find the wounded cop holding down a person on the ground and shouting for the other cop to help cuff and restrain him. He also says that person has or had a pistol, so he must be searched too. The first officer is clearly wounded by something and there's blood on the ground, evidence of a struggle, and a crowd of angry people are forming around them...

If the second cop is a "good cop" what should they do? What is right for them to do in this situation? What if the wounded cop was actually trying to get the drug dealer, the one they've been blackmailing for their illegal drug money, killed? What if that drug dealer acted in "self defense?" What if none of that was the case and the person on the ground is completely innocent and all this is just a big mistake?

Are you, as that responding officer, going to act quickly to get the situation under control or are you going to look at that other officer and say, "Well, now, let's not be hasty about this. Tell me about your childhood and did you ever have sexual thoughts about your parents?"

Aside from immediate actions, there are other things that can prevent good cops from acting. For instance, what if their department's procedure requires that certain protocols must be obeyed. That's a big deal. They have to talk to people, fill out paperwork, maybe even testify to a Grand Jury. Certainly, there's a lot of steps in some places, I bet.

There are "Whistleblower" laws in place. They can protect good officers. But, will they protect them outside of court?

Ever seen the movie "Serpico?"

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070666/

It's based on a true story and it's worth the watch in order to maybe understand other concerns an otherwise "good cop" may be hard-pressed by.


All I am saying is that doing things like calling for the revocation of Qualified Immunity and calling all cops "Bartards" (bad) is... wrongthink. We should, instead, be sure that the systems we have in place to prevent abuse and to pursue the investigation of same are robust and working well.


Bad people exist. Bad cops exist. Bad systems exist. But, not all people are bad, not all systems are bad, and not all cops are bartards.

If good cops were good, then bad cops wouldn't exist.

[Morkonan]

Publicado originalmente por Tom Macdonald:

...
the whole bodycam was posted not too long ago and it shows a group of cops turn off their bodycams except for one. and she caught a whole group of them conspiring and listening to one bad cop saying he deserved it.

So, the one that didn't turn his camera off, what kind of cop was she? She's a good cop who caught bad ones?

PS: Gotta go.

[Morkonan]

Publicado originalmente por Sir Seanicus, Esq.:

If good cops were good, then bad cops wouldn't exist.

Is it the fault of other people that bad people exist? What did you do to stop bad people? If anything, why are they still around? If nothing, then what kind of person are you?

How about we don't judge people by the actions, or inactions, of other people? We can start there and work our way down.

[SvarogX]

Publicado originalmente por Morkonan:

Publicado originalmente por Zeno:

Well yeah, but there is also cops who have a blue line on their U.S flag. Which is a sign of the total institution being at work and cops seeing themselves as a separate body of the general population. Which is usually a very bad thing and ends up badly, which we could also see with the BLM protests and how cops often acted.

I have never seen a police officer deface the US flag.

I have seen, however, the Blue Line on Black Background that symbolized officers that have fallen in the line of duty, though, and is also sometimes used by officer's friends families to show solidarity with them. (And, by others using it as a bumper-sticker to try to influence cops not to give them traffic tickets.)

Officers will band their shield/badge, too, in mourning and solidarity if an officer has died or fallen in the line of duty.

Yeah but I talk about the thin blue line on flags.

And what you described is also contribution to the sense of the total institution, even though it is in a good spirit.

This is creating an isolated corpsmanship and making cops hostile towards " average " citizens.

I have spent too much time studying this topic during my university time, to ignore that this is dangerous and let you unknowingly talk down this criticism.

[Azza ☠]

Because they are the ones involved in criminal activities which the police disrupt and they don't like the police disrupting it or arresting them for it.

[Sir Seanicus, Esq.]

Publicado originalmente por Azza ☠:

Because they are the ones involved in criminal activities which the police disrupt and they don't like the police disrupting it or arresting them for it.

Toddler: *gets flashbanged in a no-knock raid on the wrong house.*
Azza: "Criminal scum..."

[Sir Seanicus, Esq.]

Publicado originalmente por Tom Macdonald:

Publicado originalmente por Azza ☠:

Because they are the ones involved in criminal activities which the police disrupt and they don't like the police disrupting it or arresting them for it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCLXOcIXd5A

Azza: "SHOULD HAVE COMPLIED!"

[Defenestration]

Publicado originalmente por gagnrad:

All cops means all cops because even if they aren't personally corrupt, they take part in and perpetuate a system of oppression against minorities and the poor, operated by fascists, that started as, and continue to be, slave catchers through the prison industrial complex. All cops are bastards.

To punctuate, there are police oppressing students on college campuses across the country, but there weren't any police in Uvalde.

So what is the solution if nobody should be a cop? Do we have no cops to interfere with crime? What if the good cops are just powerless to do anything about the bad ones?

[Defenestration]

Publicado originalmente por Sir Seanicus, Esq.:

Publicado originalmente por Morkonan:

When did that happen?

Why didn't you stop the last murderer before they murdered someone?


Cops don't show up when good things are happening.


Remember that. And, also know what most of the time when they are involved in situations that represent the sorts of risks people are talking about, things are progressing rapidly from bad to worse. There is not enough time to have a meeting about something and the officer's state of mind can't be evaluated on-scene by a therapist before they take action or believe they must take action in order to perform their duties.

That includes those they work with.

So, let's say a cop is alone and calls for assistance. Another cop arrives to find the wounded cop holding down a person on the ground and shouting for the other cop to help cuff and restrain him. He also says that person has or had a pistol, so he must be searched too. The first officer is clearly wounded by something and there's blood on the ground, evidence of a struggle, and a crowd of angry people are forming around them...

If the second cop is a "good cop" what should they do? What is right for them to do in this situation? What if the wounded cop was actually trying to get the drug dealer, the one they've been blackmailing for their illegal drug money, killed? What if that drug dealer acted in "self defense?" What if none of that was the case and the person on the ground is completely innocent and all this is just a big mistake?

Are you, as that responding officer, going to act quickly to get the situation under control or are you going to look at that other officer and say, "Well, now, let's not be hasty about this. Tell me about your childhood and did you ever have sexual thoughts about your parents?"

Aside from immediate actions, there are other things that can prevent good cops from acting. For instance, what if their department's procedure requires that certain protocols must be obeyed. That's a big deal. They have to talk to people, fill out paperwork, maybe even testify to a Grand Jury. Certainly, there's a lot of steps in some places, I bet.

There are "Whistleblower" laws in place. They can protect good officers. But, will they protect them outside of court?

Ever seen the movie "Serpico?"

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070666/

It's based on a true story and it's worth the watch in order to maybe understand other concerns an otherwise "good cop" may be hard-pressed by.


All I am saying is that doing things like calling for the revocation of Qualified Immunity and calling all cops "Bartards" (bad) is... wrongthink. We should, instead, be sure that the systems we have in place to prevent abuse and to pursue the investigation of same are robust and working well.


Bad people exist. Bad cops exist. Bad systems exist. But, not all people are bad, not all systems are bad, and not all cops are bartards.

If good cops were good, then bad cops wouldn't exist.

Bad people will always exist, does that automatically make you a bad person? What if the good cops are just powerless to do anything about the bad ones?

[George Lincoln Rizzwell]

I thought it stood for: All Criminals Are {redacted}

[isomorphic_projection]

Publicado originalmente por Tom Macdonald:

Publicado originalmente por Morkonan:

So, the one that didn't turn his camera off, what kind of cop was she? She's a good cop who caught bad ones?

PS: Gotta go.

1 in 20? there are so many bad cops its not even funny.

From bad to totally indoctrinated, by there own state propaganda.
I would give it on a scale of 20, higher then 10.

[Azza ☠]

Publicado originalmente por Sir Seanicus, Esq.:

Publicado originalmente por Azza ☠:

Because they are the ones involved in criminal activities which the police disrupt and they don't like the police disrupting it or arresting them for it.

Toddler: *gets flashbanged in a no-knock raid on the wrong house.*
Azza: "Criminal scum..."

Publicado originalmente por Sir Seanicus, Esq.:

Publicado originalmente por Tom Macdonald:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCLXOcIXd5A

Azza: "SHOULD HAVE COMPLIED!"

I was more referring to the stereotyping claim that "All" Cops are...

I don't deny there's some corruptions or mistakes done, but still rather find it silly to make and be against all. It's like being racist and claiming all a certain race or group is criminals, etc.

Either those claims are done out of fear and merely stereotyped believes or to shift focus off your own criminal activities.

It's like Trump going "migration crimes are the worst crimes of them all"... then comparing his own crimes and mugshot to that of the black community. I'm just like okay, there's a few migration crimes to address, but a ton you are trying to shift focus off that you do yourself and you are just stereotyping entire groups to justify it.

Trump Quote: "I don’t know if you’ve heard this, but I came up with this one, Migrant crime. This crime — there’s violent crime, there’s migrant crime. We have a new category of crime. It’s called migrant crime. And it’s going to be worse than any other form of crime"

Uh huh, that's about as silly as saying the FBI is out to try assassinate you with a raid in which you weren't even there, just due to yourself being the actual criminal playing victim card... What do you want, me to cry "what-ifs" for you now? It's childish, illogical and pathetic. Why would I even bother with entertaining the idea of that, it might lower my own IQ level.

[George Lincoln Rizzwell]

Publicado originalmente por Tom Macdonald:

Publicado originalmente por Azza ☠:

I was more referring to the stereotyping claim that "All" Cops are...

I don't deny there's some corruptions or mistakes done, but still rather find it silly to make and be against all. It's like being racist and claiming all a certain race or group is criminals, etc.

cop distrust and hate isn't even on the same level.

there are a constant flow of youtube vids, millions of these that show cops and authority figures being abusive. and most of them don't think the constitution applies to them.

*Tom not realizing he's also a victim of the algorithm*