Ah yes, "I had an expectation that I could beat the hell out of people with no consequence when there was no call for violence." defense.
No one is complaining when a cop uses force, they are complaining when a cop goes out of their way to murder, torture, and beat the shit out of normal citizenry who often put up little to no fight.
Obviously it was hyperbole. Instead of addressing the essence of the point made you counter with this. Your response says much about how strong the argument you responded to is.
One should expect to live in a society in which police are not immune from breaking the law. When they mete out non judicial punishment then they should be held accountable for it in the same way I would be held accountable.
Depends on one's definition of punishment. I for one don't consider any use of force to be a punishment. The police's use of force to apprehend a suspect in crime or to prevent a crime in progress is not a punishment, IMHO. I'd rather live in a society that agrees with this so I don't live in SF or Minneapolis.
Obviously no one is saying force should never be utilized by the police. Are you unable to understand or imagine a police force functioning in such a way that they use reasonable force to apprehend suspects and don’t beat with impunity those that are already in custody? Police in Minneapolis murdered a suspect and the response to the offending officers being convicted by a jury was to stop doing their job and you appear think this is a reasonable response.
It is disheartening that you appear to be so willing to go along with with whatever police do all in the name of safety. Do you really view the world in such a way that you can’t comprehend having a police force that does it’s job without beating suspects who are already in custody?
Obviously we are listening to different people because people say just that in this very same thread. Also I don't see Escadrones de la Muerte being a problem in Minneapolis or anywhere in the US for that matter, so what extrajudicial punishment you are taking about if you don't mind my asking?
It appears to be you, who claimed that the police actions should be judged just like everyone else's here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35452473
Everyone else cannot really use force to arrest suspects and using force to prevent crime in progress is a very complicated matter for regular citizens too.
You do have a capacity for missing the point and context. The “this” in my first sentence referred to what someone said. Specifically police pulling back when challenged. No reasonable person thinks police should never use force and no one is declaring otherwise. Police doing illegal things with impunity is what people are decrying. Are you deliberately being obtuse?
> Everyone else cannot really use force to arrest suspects and using force to prevent crime in progress is a very complicated matter for regular citizens too.
In most states, anybody can use force to arrest criminals,
Of course the devil is in the details. I wouldn't risk my own neck by attempting a citizens arrest in a place like SF, because I think the prosecutors/etc there would be more interested in making an example out of me for daring to care, than punishing the actual criminal. Evidently the police of SF feel similar.
"suspects" != "criminals".
And we had just recently seen what happened to a gentleman who merely filmed such an arrest[1] of such a suspect, have not we? So yes, technically you can use force and do a citizen arrest if you don't care about consequences.
Actually, one should expect to live in a society where you do not get randomly stabbed and die in the street. This means that the spirit of law should reflect the necessity that arresting criminals gets higher priority than prosecuting cops.
In fact, by treating the two as the same, you commit a deep injustice, because a violent action does not get judged the same as its violent reaction.
This means that the spirit of law should reflect the necessity that arresting criminals gets higher priority than prosecuting cops.
I don’t think you understand the implications of what you just wrote. I thank you for stating this because it means we are in complete agreement. When a cop breaks the law they are in fact a criminal and, as you just stated, prosecuting criminals gets a high priority.
We agree. Criminals ought to be prosecuted. I’m glad you are in favor of prosecuting police who break the law.
