• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Reply to: Chauvin Verdict

Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Chauvin Verdict"

Collapse

  • vetran
    replied
    Originally posted by NotAllThere View Post

    I think the issue in this US is really egregious behaviour can result in no penalty. Just read the cases of some of the people who've ended up on death row who were eventually exonerated (as ever, generally poor people who can't afford lawyers).
    The problem is the opponents tend to want to remove all sense and make the Police powerless rather than making them behave. Their idea is that criminals are just misunderstood and a result of poverty. Completely gaga.

    Leave a comment:


  • NotAllThere
    replied
    Originally posted by OwlHoot View Post

    A constable must have qualified immunity, up to a point. Otherwise legally, they would almost be prevented from detaining anyone or laying a finger on them.

    A citizen (in the UK) can make an arrest only if:

    * They believe the perp has committed a crime
    * The perp has indeed committed the crime
    * The crime is serious enough to warrant at least two years in jail (this being intended to correspond to what used to be called a felony, as opposed to a misdemeanor)

    Coppers can arrest under more liberal conditions, such as on suspicion that a crime is about to be committed, even if it hasn't been already.
    I think the issue in this US is really egregious behaviour can result in no penalty. Just read the cases of some of the people who've ended up on death row who were eventually exonerated (as ever, generally poor people who can't afford lawyers).

    Leave a comment:


  • OwlHoot
    replied
    Originally posted by NotAllThere View Post
    Absolutely. US society is really screwed up when it comes to race relations. And their police seem to have less accountability than in more civilised countries - checkout qualified immunity and the issues with that.
    A constable must have qualified immunity, up to a point. Otherwise legally, they would almost be prevented from detaining anyone or laying a finger on them.

    A citizen (in the UK), which is what a constable would be without any extra powers, can make an arrest only if:

    * at the time of the arrest they believe no constable is on hand to make the arrest
    * They believe the perp has committed a crime
    * The perp has indeed committed the crime
    * The crime is indictable, i.e. serious enough to warrant at least two years in jail (this being intended to correspond to what used to be called a felony, as opposed to a misdemeanor)

    See https://www.westminstersecurity.co.u...arrest-uk-law/

    Coppers can arrest under more liberal conditions, such as on suspicion that a crime is about to be committed, even if it hasn't been already.
    Last edited by OwlHoot; 23 April 2021, 20:29.

    Leave a comment:


  • NotAllThere
    replied
    Originally posted by vetran View Post

    should they eat rice & peas?
    Cheesy Peas!

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    Originally posted by NotAllThere View Post
    What a strange response.

    Einstein was German, Swiss and American. He became American at the age of 61. After Germany and Switzerland had given us his best work.
    Who said they're thick? Or even that Americans are - very odd interpretation there.
    The US has a very specific culture and heritage that has led them to where they are now. I.e. they're where they are now because they're American.
    should they eat rice & peas?

    Leave a comment:


  • DealorNoDeal
    replied
    I watch a lot of crime reality programmes and policing in America is so different to here.

    If someone gets murdered here, especially with a firearm, it's a big deal. There'll be an SIO and a team of dozens of detectives investigating it. In parts of America, it's so common place that they'll often only put a couple of detectives on it. And if it isn't solved quickly, it gets parked unless any new leads come in.

    Detectives there will routinely visit homes of suspects they know have got a gun. That would never happen here; there'd be a full risk assessment and a tactical firearms squad would be sent in.

    Since the 1980s, there have been over 200,000 unsolved homicides in the US.

    It's a dangerous place to be a police officer and it's no wonder a lot of suspects end up getting injured or killed.

    Leave a comment:


  • NotAllThere
    replied
    Originally posted by vetran View Post

    Yep because the people that gave us Einstein, Edison, Hopper and Oppenheimer are obviously a bit thick! Oh casual racism alert!
    What a strange response.

    Einstein was German, Swiss and American. He became American at the age of 61. After Germany and Switzerland had given us his best work.
    Who said they're thick? Or even that Americans are - very odd interpretation there.
    The US has a very specific culture and heritage that has led them to where they are now. I.e. they're where they are now because they're American.

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    Originally posted by NotAllThere View Post
    it's part of it, in my view, but also historical reasons, continued injustices for many many years after emancipation.

    The simplest answer that encompasses all the facets is - they're American.
    Yep because the people that gave us Einstein, Edison, Hopper and Oppenheimer are obviously a bit thick! Oh casual racism alert!

    Leave a comment:


  • NotAllThere
    replied
    Originally posted by minestrone View Post
    The dominant ethnicity and culture in the South was working class Scots and Scots Irish. Black people ended up there and absorbed the extreme religions and behaviours of that group.

    When the blacks migrated away in the 60s they took the worst behaviours and left the religion behind.

    I thought that theory was crap at first but I have to say it sounds about right. It's from black rednecks and white liberals.
    Very coherent. Well done.

    Leave a comment:


  • minestrone
    replied
    The dominant ethnicity and culture in the South was working class Scots and Scots Irish. Black people ended up there and absorbed the extreme religions and behaviours of that group.

    When the blacks migrated away in the 60s they took the worst behaviours and left the religion behind.

    I thought that theory was crap at first but I have to say it sounds about right. It's from black rednecks and white liberals.

    Leave a comment:


  • NotAllThere
    replied
    Originally posted by DealorNoDeal View Post
    There may be a simple answer to explain it (eg. systemic racism) but maybe not.
    it's part of it, in my view, but also historical reasons, continued injustices for many many years after emancipation.

    The simplest answer that encompasses all the facets is - they're American.

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    Originally posted by Lost It View Post
    There isn't an answer until you know the question, if it's poverty that creates the conditions, the US should be rich enough to deal with that. If it's drugs, well that's a filthy rich industry all of it's own and we can only guess at what pressures the US government is under from OC to keep that particular profit making business going without any real interference.

    Gun crime, well that's never going to stop whilst the average US citizen believes it's ok to have more firearms in the home than the average WW2 soldier took onto the beach on D day. That's a mentality problem, probably relevant when there was a risk of lawlessness or wild animals, or whatever the risks were when the founding fathers thought that one up.

    The Police officer who goes to work every day over there not knowing if he will be shot, stabbed, clubbed, run over, crushed or assaulted is a type of human that is either slightly nuts or doesn't care? I don't know but if my life expectancy was at risk because of those conditions I'd quickly find something else to do.

    It appears a lot of officers are thinking the same way over there. Why risk the chance you will finish up in court or prison for trying to do your job of protection the masses? Not worth any kind of wage is it.
    20/20 hindsight is brilliant and about as much use as a screen door on a submarine.
    Its gone from thankyou for your service to screw you for your service.

    I avoided joining the Military, healthcare and Police as there was far too much risk and responsibility for me. I have to admire those who have the guts to do it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lost It
    replied
    There isn't an answer until you know the question, if it's poverty that creates the conditions, the US should be rich enough to deal with that. If it's drugs, well that's a filthy rich industry all of it's own and we can only guess at what pressures the US government is under from OC to keep that particular profit making business going without any real interference.

    Gun crime, well that's never going to stop whilst the average US citizen believes it's ok to have more firearms in the home than the average WW2 soldier took onto the beach on D day. That's a mentality problem, probably relevant when there was a risk of lawlessness or wild animals, or whatever the risks were when the founding fathers thought that one up.

    The Police officer who goes to work every day over there not knowing if he will be shot, stabbed, clubbed, run over, crushed or assaulted is a type of human that is either slightly nuts or doesn't care? I don't know but if my life expectancy was at risk because of those conditions I'd quickly find something else to do.

    It appears a lot of officers are thinking the same way over there. Why risk the chance you will finish up in court or prison for trying to do your job of protection the masses? Not worth any kind of wage is it.
    20/20 hindsight is brilliant and about as much use as a screen door on a submarine.
    Last edited by Lost It; 22 April 2021, 10:51.

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    Originally posted by DealorNoDeal View Post
    There may be a simple answer to explain it (eg. systemic racism) but maybe not.
    The figures don't support that being the only cause but that is what we are asked to believe.

    Leave a comment:


  • DealorNoDeal
    replied
    I wouldn't fancy being a cop in some parts of America. There must be a significant risk, every single day, of getting seriously injured, or killed, in the line of duty.

    You've probably got be a bit of a hard bastard to survive that. Maybe even a bit of a head case to want to keep doing it.

    Some may be racist. Maybe, in some neighbourhoods, the risk of getting injured at the hands of a black offender is much higher, or at least the perception is.

    There may be a simple answer to explain it (eg. systemic racism) but maybe not.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X