When the cops are the criminals

[MachineGhost]

But, but, but! That's one of the very few things that government is supposed to do because private enterprise can't do it!
Note:

If we're going to outsource law enforcement duties, the trick will be to keep them under airtight control with no chance of coercive blowback, cronyism, corruption or murder.  If public cops can't even be controlled now, you think private cops will be?  Here's a small taste of such a future: http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/about_hal/about.html

[Pointedstick]

If we're going to outsource law enforcement duties, the trick will be to keep them under airtight control with no chance of coercive blowback, cronyism, corruption or murder.  If public cops can't even be controlled now, you think private cops will be?  Here's a small taste of such a future: http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/about_hal/about.html

...What? I don't understand what Halliburton has to do with the apparently successful implementation of a private police force.  If it's working, it's working, right?

[Libertarian666]

But, but, but! That's one of the very few things that government is supposed to do because private enterprise can't do it!
Note:

If we're going to outsource law enforcement duties, the trick will be to keep them under airtight control with no chance of coercive blowback, cronyism, corruption or murder.  If public cops can't even be controlled now, you think private cops will be?  Here's a small taste of such a future: http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/about_hal/about.html

Yes, I think private "cops" will be. In fact, there are more private security guards in the US than public cops, and they are involved in far fewer crimes.

Why is this? Consider the following questions and you should be able to figure it out.
1. What usually happens to a cop who commits a crime?
2. What usually happens to a private citizen, including a security guard, who commits a crime?

[MachineGhost]

...What? I don't understand what Halliburton has to do with the apparently successful implementation of a private police force.  If it's working, it's working, right?

I was thinking of the military contractors, but I guess that was KBR -- a subsidiary of Haliburton -- before they spun it off.  Anyway, my point still stands.  Corruption is inevitable and it is far worse when done by unaccountable private interests.  With a jaundiced eye I want to point out the decrease in crime is not because its a private police force, its because the tactics employed are completely different.  We can argue over whether that is due to them being responsible to the client in doing a great job for getting paid or not (for now).

If we publically employed RoboCops the outcome would be even better.  Its the tactics.

[Libertarian666]

...What? I don't understand what Halliburton has to do with the apparently successful implementation of a private police force.  If it's working, it's working, right?

I was thinking of the military contractors, but I guess that was KBR -- a subsidiary of Haliburton -- before they spun it off.  Anyway, my point still stands.  Corruption is inevitable and it is far worse when done by unaccountable private interests.  With a jaundiced eye I want to point out the decrease in crime is not because its a private police force, its because the tactics employed are completely different.  We can argue over whether that is due to them being responsible to the client in doing a great job for getting paid or not (for now).

If we publically employed RoboCops the outcome would be even better.  Its the tactics.

I don't agree that private interests are any more unaccountable or any more corrupt than public police. Public police assault people all the time and nothing is done about it, nor will it be. Private guards don't assault people all the time, precisely because something WOULD be done about it.

Incentives matter.

[MachineGhost]

Incentives matter.

And you think that a private police force would somehow remain immune to the government's perverse incentives even if funded indirectly?  You can't have your cake and eat it too when you declare the influence will matter for school vouchers but not for contracted private police.

Maybe the best solution is that all of us literally own a private RoboCop.

[Libertarian666]

Incentives matter.

And you think that a private police force would somehow remain immune to the government's perverse incentives even if funded indirectly?  You can't have your cake and eat it too when you declare the influence will matter for school vouchers but not for contracted private police.

Maybe the best solution is that all of us literally own a private RoboCop.

No, the answer is that there should not be any publicly funded police. If you and/or your neighbors want to hire security guards, go for it. They will be subject to the same laws that the rest of us are, which means they would be MUCH more careful not to assault an innocent person. They also would not be interested in enforcing "victimless crime" laws, where the actual victims are those arrested, as no one would pay them to do that.

Read "The Probability Broach" and its sequels to get a fair idea of how this might work; of course that is fiction, but the very large number of private security guards are here already, and they don't get involved in any of the intractable issues that public police do, because they don't have the agenda that the public police's masters do.

By the way, I have secondhand but very reliable testimony about the difference between public and private policing. My ex-wife lived in a building in Queens that was targeted for crime by all the local thugs. It contained mostly elderly residents and was on the border of a high-crime area. So every time someone left the building, they had a pretty good chance of getting mugged. They complained to the police, who said "we can't be there all the time". So they hired a security company, which cost something like $30/month per apartment, and they WERE there all the time. Problem solved!

And the best part is that even though they couldn't make anyone contribute, enough people (about half) did contribute voluntarily to pay the security company. So even the dreaded "free rider" problem didn't interfere with an excellent outcome.

[MachineGhost]

Diminutive Virginia inmate repeatedly beaten and raped by other prisoners; guards ignore repeated pleas for help—for years. 4th Circuit: The inmate might have a plausible Eighth Amendment claim.

Man refuses to leave his mother’s house. Mother calls Omaha, Neb. police, who order him to leave. He does not, so officer takes him to ground, punches him, and kicks him, breaking five ribs and tearing his intestine. Jury: There’s some excessive force here, but man shoulda done what he was told; $1 in damages is appropriate. 8th Circuit: Fine by us.

[MachineGhost]

Allegation: Virginia Beach, Va. police officer throws unresisting non-suspect to ground, punches her, breaking a rib, cuffs her, and yanks her back up by her ponytail. 4th Circuit: A jury might think that’s excessive force.

Incapacitated by a taser, suspect does not comply with officers’ commands. Does that justify further tasing (in this case over four times the recommended duration, which caused brain damage)? 6th Circuit: No qualified immunity.

Pennington County, S.D. deputy shoots, kills suspect he says was advancing on him with a knife. But no knife was found, and one of the bullets entered through the suspect’s back. So no qualified immunity, says the 8th Circuit.

Among other material misrepresentations, LAPD detectives testify they found one pair of footprints at a crime scene when in fact there were two. Man spends 26 years in prison for the murder of his mother. 9th Circuit: No absolute immunity.

Albuquerque, N.M. police place backpack in a public spot, arrest couple who take it. All charges dropped. 10th Circuit: There was probable cause for arrest; the couple was not entrapped; and the district court should explain why the officers are not entitled to qualified immunity on the malicious prosecution and due process claims. 

Miami, Fla. police pull over car, shoot unresisting passenger in his privates, and take their time requesting an ambulance—and then cause further delay by reporting only a “laceration,”? a lower priority than a gunshot wound. 11th Circuit: A jury might conclude the officers acted with deliberate indifference.

[moda0306]

Come on MG.  Some Muslim in Algeria cut his wife's head off.  He's a bigger threat to us than this.

[moda0306]

I can't remember the episode, but I recently heard Dan Carlin explain an event where a man was repeatedly cavity-searched  over and over because cops just KNEW he had something.  The official report was appalling, and is rape if anything.

I've tried googling for it, but can't find it. Perhaps someone else knows what I'm talking about.


EDIT: FOUND IT!  Below.

[moda0306]

Found it!

http://www.krmg.com/news/news/minor-tra ... ty-/nbhqX/

The lawsuit says Eckert was then forced to undergo a laundry list of medical procedures in the officers' effort to find drugs:

His abdominal area was X-rayed.
Two digital examinations were performed by doctors.
Three separate enemas and being forced to "defecate in front of doctors and police" on numerous occasions.
Another X-ray and finally a colonoscopy were performed

This is over drugs, people.  Not terrorism.  This is what happens when you chisel away at the 4th amendment, have tons of victimless crime laws, and allow enough time to pass for police to start using these privileges to generate more revenue instead of stopping terrorist Muslim Jihadists.

[MachineGhost]

Come on MG.  Some Muslim in Algeria cut his wife's head off.  He's a bigger threat to us than this.

Buzz.  Wrong thread for that.  File it under "Islam -- the Religion of Peace".

[moda0306]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsqLf-Ne8QY

Fuckall.

[Ad Orientem]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsqLf-Ne8QY

Fuckall.

Wow. That cop should be fired and charged with felony battery.

[moda0306]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsqLf-Ne8QY

Fuckall.

Wow. That cop should be fired and charged with felony battery.

This makes one wonder what all went on before common use of video cameras in public areas.  I have to think it was much, much worse.

[Libertarian666]

Found it!

http://www.krmg.com/news/news/minor-tra ... ty-/nbhqX/

The lawsuit says Eckert was then forced to undergo a laundry list of medical procedures in the officers' effort to find drugs:

His abdominal area was X-rayed.
Two digital examinations were performed by doctors.
Three separate enemas and being forced to "defecate in front of doctors and police" on numerous occasions.
Another X-ray and finally a colonoscopy were performed

This is over drugs, people.  Not terrorism.  This is what happens when you chisel away at the 4th amendment, have tons of victimless crime laws, and allow enough time to pass for police to start using these privileges to generate more revenue instead of stopping terrorist Muslim Jihadists.

Yes, although for some reason I'm a lot more concerned about the police than the terrorist Muslims. Maybe because I have about 10,000x more chance of being abused by police than terrorist Muslims? Nah, that couldn't be it!

[MachineGhost]

https://life.indiegogo.com/fundraisers/ ... artese--2/

[MachineGhost]

Man convicted of killing drug dealer with a baseball bat serves 14 years of his sentence. 7th Circuit: Eyewitnesses probably could not have seen what they said they saw because it was dark and the trial judge’s conclusion that the convict knew the victim was a dealer was “unreasonable conjecture.”?

Douglas County, Neb. officers seize $63,530 cash from motorist, though they found no contraband. The motorist is not charged with a crime. Can the government keep the money anyway? 8th Circuit: Yes.

FBI agents suspect St. Louis, Mo. parking meter attendant was not attending meters. Without a warrant, they install a GPS tracker on his car. Even if such surveillance is unconstitutional, says the 8th Circuit, the evidence is admissible.

[Ad Orientem]

Maybe he should have taken traveler’s checks.

But it’s too late for that now. All the money – $16,000 in cash – that Joseph Rivers said he had saved and relatives had given him to launch his dream in Hollywood is gone, seized during his trip out West not by thieves but by Drug Enforcement Administration agents during a stop at the Amtrak train station in Albuquerque.

An incident some might argue is still theft, just with the government’s blessing.

Rivers, 22, wasn’t detained and has not been charged with any crime since his money was taken last month.

That doesn’t matter. Under a federal law enforcement tool called civil asset forfeiture, he need never be arrested or convicted of a crime for the government to take away his cash, cars or property – and keep it.

Agencies like the DEA can confiscate money or property if they have a hunch, a suspicion, a notion that maybe, possibly, perhaps the items are connected with narcotics. Or something else illegal.

Or maybe the fact that the person holding a bunch of cash is a young black man is good enough.

Read the rest here...

http://www.abqjournal.com/580107/news/d ... ducer.html

[Pointedstick]

Maybe he should have taken traveler’s checks.

But it’s too late for that now. All the money – $16,000 in cash – that Joseph Rivers said he had saved and relatives had given him to launch his dream in Hollywood is gone, seized during his trip out West not by thieves but by Drug Enforcement Administration agents during a stop at the Amtrak train station in Albuquerque.

An incident some might argue is still theft, just with the government’s blessing.

Rivers, 22, wasn’t detained and has not been charged with any crime since his money was taken last month.

That doesn’t matter. Under a federal law enforcement tool called civil asset forfeiture, he need never be arrested or convicted of a crime for the government to take away his cash, cars or property – and keep it.

Agencies like the DEA can confiscate money or property if they have a hunch, a suspicion, a notion that maybe, possibly, perhaps the items are connected with narcotics. Or something else illegal.

Or maybe the fact that the person holding a bunch of cash is a young black man is good enough.

Read the rest here...

http://www.abqjournal.com/580107/news/d ... ducer.html

What's especially sad is that civil asset forfeiture was just banned by the New Mexico legislature a month or so ago. But these were federal thieves, not state thieves.

https://www.aclu-nm.org/victory-new-mex ... w/2015/04/

[moda0306]

Maybe he should have taken traveler’s checks.

But it’s too late for that now. All the money – $16,000 in cash – that Joseph Rivers said he had saved and relatives had given him to launch his dream in Hollywood is gone, seized during his trip out West not by thieves but by Drug Enforcement Administration agents during a stop at the Amtrak train station in Albuquerque.

An incident some might argue is still theft, just with the government’s blessing.

Rivers, 22, wasn’t detained and has not been charged with any crime since his money was taken last month.

That doesn’t matter. Under a federal law enforcement tool called civil asset forfeiture, he need never be arrested or convicted of a crime for the government to take away his cash, cars or property – and keep it.

Agencies like the DEA can confiscate money or property if they have a hunch, a suspicion, a notion that maybe, possibly, perhaps the items are connected with narcotics. Or something else illegal.

Or maybe the fact that the person holding a bunch of cash is a young black man is good enough.

Read the rest here...

http://www.abqjournal.com/580107/news/d ... ducer.html

What's especially sad is that civil asset forfeiture was just banned by the New Mexico legislature a month or so ago. But these were federal thieves, not state thieves.

https://www.aclu-nm.org/victory-new-mex ... w/2015/04/

I think this has to be viewed in the right context... and I personally think it's great that it's starting to make headway, even if it's currently somewhat unevenly focused and being contested. When you have guys like Rand Paul and people on the far left coming together on stuff like this, it's always fun to see.

Did you see that thing about the (I think New Mexico) guy that was more-or-less raped by the police and a doctor that thought he had drugs up his ass?


http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/201 ... settlement

[MachineGhost]

https://www.aclu-nm.org/victory-new-mex ... w/2015/04/

Joseph is raising funds to replace what the Frackin' Fed Pigs stole from him: https://www.gofundme.com/u6e2mwc
I hope everyone donates!

And ACLU showboating about the ending of civil asset forfeiture in NM is very hollow.  They've long ago given up on any semblance of protecting any real civil liberties.  Don't be fooled.  They're staffed by non-profit careerists and only take stupid cases like prosecuting against school choice (which they consistently lose), public religious symbols or other stupid meaningless shit like employment discrimination.  Please don't send any resources their way.  They're about as useful as the NAACP.

1 down, 49 to go.

[Libertarian666]

https://www.aclu-nm.org/victory-new-mex ... w/2015/04/

Joseph is raising funds to replace what the Frackin' Fed Pigs stole from him: https://www.gofundme.com/u6e2mwc
I hope everyone donates!

And ACLU showboating about the ending of civil asset forfeiture in NM is very hollow.  They've long ago given up on any semblance of protecting any real civil liberties.  Don't be fooled.  They're staffed by non-profit careerists and only take stupid cases like prosecuting against school choice (which they consistently lose), public religious symbols or other stupid meaningless shit like employment discrimination.  Please don't send any resources their way.  They're about as useful as the NAACP.

1 down, 49 to go.

I have replied to their fundraising efforts by saying "Let me know when you restrict your efforts to protecting ACTUAL rights, not made up ones like 'the right to force someone to bake a wedding cake for you', and I'll give you some more money.

[MachineGhost]

[quote=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/evan-bern ... 09308.html]In the real world, the Fourth Amendment is often irrelevant. That's the provocative claim that Radley Balko makes in a recent blog for the Washington Post. Balko focuses on two recent stories involving police conduct that seems to defy the Supreme Court's Fourth Amendment rulings. One involves DUI checkpoints that appear to have less to do with preventing drunk driving than with generating revenue from minor traffic violations; another involves a frightening and brutal encounter between two border patrol agents and a young woman who got shot with a stun gun after asserting her Fourth Amendment rights. Balko's conclusion: "When it comes to the Fourth Amendment, the law as it's laid out in Supreme Court opinions is often quite a bit different than the law on the ground."

What can be done to ensure that police officers are held accountable for Fourth Amendment violations? The only way to ensure police officers are appropriately sanctioned for violating people's rights and victims are made whole is consistent judicial engagement. What follows are three proposals for making the law on the ground more consistent with the law of the land. [/quote]