Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
![]()
Do they? My gut says it should, which is why I need data, especially since the last actual report I had went against what I naturally assumed would be the findings.
while I'd object to the term 'brutality' the fact is that police officers in their proper duties do frequently have to use some level of force to obtain compliance. Knowing that their cams will show what actually happened, officers may feel more comfortable in applying appropriate but without the camera potentially problematic levels of force.
An officer without a body cam might avoid using force on a suspect he or she is fully justified in using force on to avoid complaints or accusations. It’s definitley happened before.
With a body cam, the officer can use the level of force appropriate to the situation without any worries.
Edited by archonspeaks on Feb 21st 2019 at 1:12:00 AM
They should have sent a poet.Are you from the US? Sincerely asking, cause our cops have a long history of hurting people of color (and sometimes white people) for no good reason.
While also bringing white serial killers who shot at the cops into the station without a scratch.
I cannot take your concern that cops are using too little force seriously.
Edited by wisewillow on Feb 21st 2019 at 4:15:17 AM
I am, originally from Georgia (Dragon Con is awesome!)
I don't know if they are systematically using less force then they are able, but it does seem to me to be a potential situation.
To me, a bodycam covers both situations where more force is justified and when it's not. It gives us more information and clarity about the situation that was being faced by the officer in question.
The history of why the police act the way that they do is written in their blood.
Edited by Soban on Feb 21st 2019 at 4:24:45 AM
![]()
![]()
That’s a strawman and you know it.
It’s estimated there are around 50,000 use of force incidents every week in the US. Are you suggesting every one of those, or even the majority of them, are inappropriate? The threat and use of force is a basic part of the job description for police, in any country.
I wasn’t saying that the police use too little force, but that body cams have no real effect on use of force rates, and moreover that that’s not a useful metric to determine whether they’re effective.
Edited by archonspeaks on Feb 21st 2019 at 1:25:37 AM
They should have sent a poet.Whether or not body cams solve anything, it does give us more information about whatever was going on, which helps us have a clearer picture of what happened, which is for the best.
There's a hundred other issues to work with before the Usonian police can be said to work as intended (unless you're a MAGA nutter, in which case it's working swell), but it is a tool that should very much be employed.
My position was that bodycams don’t have any real effect on overall use of force rates, and that that’s not a useful metric to determine whether they’re worthwhile. Here’s what you interpreted that as:
Feel free to respond to my actual point.
They should have sent a poet.You straight up said more use of force might be a good thing.
In a country where cops are regularly brutally hurt by people they interact with, and aren’t allowed to defend themselves, this might be a valid point.
In the context of our current police system and rampant use of excessive force, it’s reprehensible to suggest more use of force could be good.
Okay, I learned something new. It sounds incredibly stupid. I get why the term American annoys people from Canada and central and South America, but Usonian is not commonly used, hence my confusion.
Edited by wisewillow on Feb 21st 2019 at 4:35:30 AM
![]()
![]()
And yet no actual person from the US uses it.
![]()
It annoys them because they can't wrap their head around the idea of a North and South America, or at the very least, that "America" is shorthand for "United States of America" and not the entire damn land mass containing the two continents.
Edited by PhysicalStamina on Feb 21st 2019 at 4:39:02 AM
i'm tired, my friendArchon, it is not a good look to take someone's concern about police brutality and say that it is a strawman. A strawman would be accusing you of not caring about police brutality without evidence. Which, to be fair, is the reading I'm getting from your posts.
And Usonian has been growing on me as a word instead of American, for the duel reason of providing an alternative to American while sounding pleasant to the ears.
Edit: I appear to be in the minority in thinking that Usonian sounds nice.
Edited by AzurePaladin on Feb 21st 2019 at 4:40:52 AM
The awful things he says and does are burned into our cultural consciousness like a CRT display left on the same picture too long. -FighteerPersonally, I utterly refuse to use anything other than American.
Our country is the United States of America ergo we're American.
If people want to use some silly alternative that's their business but I'm not going to.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Feb 21st 2019 at 4:38:40 AM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
I think you may have read my initial post incorrectly.
Use of force rates don’t really change when bodycams are introduced. Some have speculated that this is because the decrease in unjustified use of force they cause is offset by the increase in justified use of force they also cause. Justified use of force is not a bad thing.
Therefore I can’t really see how overall use of force rates would be useful to determine whether bodycams are worthwhile. As I mentioned, the more pertinent statistics would be misconduct reports and civilian complaints.
It’s estimated that there are 50,000 use of force incidents in the US every week. This can be anything from a firearm being discharged to an officer grabbing someone’s arm. Unjustified use of force is a serious issue in the US, and bodycams are a worthwhile part of that solution.
My position was not, and has never been “police use too little force”. That’s your strawman right there.
Edited by archonspeaks on Feb 21st 2019 at 1:42:57 AM
They should have sent a poet.@Fourthspartan: Of course, the side-problem with the "American" nomenclature is that it leads to the usual hubris of the US taking for itself the name of the entire continent.
"All you Fascists bound to lose."![]()
Well, as far as Europeans and the founders at the time considered we did. Haiti wouldn't become independent for some years afterwords, and the Europeans tended to discount the Native Americans.
There were also ambitions to spread Democracy across the continent if I recall correctly, the predecessor to Manifest Destiny.
Edited by AzurePaladin on Feb 21st 2019 at 4:43:58 AM
The awful things he says and does are burned into our cultural consciousness like a CRT display left on the same picture too long. -FighteerAnd that's something I think is kinda sad. I kinda like Usonian, it feels more sci-fi. I think it's a perfectly serviceable word and probably actually better then American. I lived in a Frank Lloyd Wright style house when I was young and the style has always had some attraction for me.
Peelian principles summarise the ideas that Sir Robert Peel developed to define an ethical police force. The nine principles were as follows:
1. To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.
2. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour, and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.
3. To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.
4. To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.
5. To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour, and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.
6. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.
7. To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
8. To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary, of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.
9. To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.
I'm not sure that police in America follow these rules very well, particularly when dealing with minorities. The seventh is pretty much never followed.
Edited by Soban on Feb 21st 2019 at 4:45:00 AM

Please explain how more police brutality is a good thing.
Edited by wisewillow on Feb 21st 2019 at 4:00:09 AM