Jump to content

Mercer

Member
  • Posts

    21,284
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    237

Everything posted by Mercer

  1. Mercer

    A.C.A.B.

    It's not disingenuous. From my perspective, most people look up to law enforcement, judges, elected officials, etc. and they're afforded privileges because of their social positions. I'm totally OK with that, in fact, I'd probably assume I do this myself to some degree. I may treat someone differently simply based on their profession, and the implied level of accountability that comes with it. For example, I don't let people smoke weed when I have guests that are in LE over at parties. While there may be other people here that are equally as turned off by the smell, or thought of weed smoke, I just don't want to put my neighbor in a position where he has to leave, or even deal with it. Personally, I like weed, and encourage people to smoke over drinking alcohol, but out of respect I set the rules in my house to accommodate them in a way I wouldn't for others. Now with that said, that's my choice, and I'm in my crib where I set the rules, and these rules only apply to the people who are here by choice making the entire situation voluntary. But I'd never expect the laws that govern the land, where people no longer have a voluntary choice in the matter to be different. Like if a semi illiterate pizza delivery person steals X from me, he should get the same punishment as if a millionaire Harvard professor steals that same X from me. If a cop gets X as punishment for a rape, why should a civilian get more or less for the exact same crime. While I agree there's an added crime of someone abusing their power while committing the crime, the punishment for the crime itself should be the same. I just don't think a two tiered system of justice would fix the problem, even if punishments were harsher for government officials under this two tiered system. Studies show administering harsher penalties for crime, or even legal violations like speeding have little to no effect on rates of crime/violation. What does work much better is enforcement efforts that make it obvious you'll face a consequence, even a small consequence more likely. Like if you know you can speed down a stretch of road, and 99 times out of 100 you'll face no consequence, but that hundredth time you'll face a $1000.00 fine, you'll probably still speed just as much as if the fine was only $200. By comparison, if you knew you'd be caught 60% of the time, but face only a $20 fine, you'd probably never speed. Harsh penalties sound like they'd curb problems, but if the drug war has taught us anything, they don't. This is why I'd prefer a system where a police department isn't responsible for investigating itself, or it's own officers when they're accused of wrongdoing. Likewise the same applies to a criminal, or civil judicial system. By granting them monopolies, this almost guarantees they'll get away with whatever violation/crime they want to 99 times out of 100. Same way a priest is confident that if the Arch Diocese finds out their having sexual relations with a minor, they'll probably just be transferred to save the church embarrassment, but if an outside organization like law enforcement catches them, they're more likely to face consequences. I just assume that violent human predators like pedophiles, rapists, and such can come from all walks of life. Some of these types actively seek out these positions of power for this reason, and abuse it. That's not to say I view all cops as bad, or all priests as pedophiles. I just acknowledge that no matter what, these people will exist, and I want a system in place that makes them face consequences more often than they do now, as opposed to harsher consequences when/if they ever do get caught. That's the main difference we have here, I'm suggesting creating a system that allows for a more consistent mechanism for accountability, you're suggesting a break from equal punishment/accountability under the law. Like a road laced with speed cameras at every stretch, VS a single cop on that road that can't catch everyone, but can punish who they do catch harshly. For me, what it boils down to is this. I'm equally accountable, and responsible for my actions as any other adult (aside from adults with severe mental disabilities) no matter their background, or circumstances. If you were abused as a kid, grew up poor, had a shit school, or just ended up poor from bad luck, or if you were born with a silver spoon I don't care, just don't tread on me or mines, period. In my eyes, you're still responsible for your actions. This equal expectation of accountability applies to all adults, including LE, and government officials. Were all equal under the law, and the mechanism for seeing this concept through to it's conclusion should be fair, and at least work with some degree of reliability.
  2. Mercer

    A.C.A.B.

    Should be, and are, are two very different things. We're basically talking about the Catholic Church making a public decree here saying "pedophilia will be harshly punished", but at the same time expecting the Catholic church itself, to police itself, after demonstrating it's already a complete failure to do just that.
  3. Mercer

    A.C.A.B.

    You're acknowledging the "held to a higher degree of accountability" system's inability to enforce existing laws, or even work. I don't understand the logic behind assuming changing the laws will somehow fix it. I'm saying there shouldn't be a two tiered caste system under the law. Law enforcement should be 100% carried out by private security organizations, which are by nature independent, and subject to actually following laws since the monopoly on violence is broken, and it wouldn't be themselves that are the only ones responsible for, or capable of policing themselves.
  4. Mercer

    A.C.A.B.

    Fully agree, there are absolutely no equals. But this doesn't mean if I noticed the person breaking into my house illegally, and threatening me, or my wife was illiterate, or an elected official I wouldn't put away the 10mm, and pull out the .22. This is how the free market and voluntary exclusion work, but not how legal matters work. We're all equal under the law. Again, there are already laws specifically pertaining to people violating positions of trust, they do not have much, if any effect. I'm just using Sharia to draw a comparison between our legal system that at least attempts to apply logical consistency, and tries to hold individuals equally accountable, and Sharia law, where this approach isn't taken. A cleric or whatever can declare "punishment should be 100 lashes of the whip, instead of 10 because Allah gave them more responsibility by his divine intervention". Western legal code is intended to view all citizens as equal. The end results are never equal when hiring legal representation is crucial, but at least on paper, the laws are intended to be applied equally. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_justice_under_law
  5. Mercer

    A.C.A.B.

    So if adults with different "capabilities" should be judged differently under the law, I'd assume an illiterate person should be able to murder and get less punishment than a college professor? How could we administer this different levels of accountability law, and prevent it from being abused down the line when people dislike landlords for example? This different tiered system is a dead end argument. We're all equal under the law, whether it's our current archaic system of laws we're subject to under our current constitutional democracy, or one modeled under the non-aggression principal. The entire purpose of law/legal code is to apply the code fairly, and evenly regardless of the person's caste, creed, or status.
  6. Mercer

    A.C.A.B.

    There's a difference between acknowledging children are not as capable, or that the mentally ill/challenged are not as capable by definition, then setting up different sets of rules for two sets of capable adults. When standing in the presence of a government official, I don't feel the same sort of inferiority, or child like awe as a child feels standing in the presence of an adult. I feel these adults are my equal, but I don't feel like children, and even teenagers are my equals.
  7. Mercer

    A.C.A.B.

    Yea, but a harsher punishment approach for the same crimes isn't in line with the foundational basis of written legal code. Written legal code was originally put into place to be applied to individuals equally, which is why they wrote the laws down instead of just having judges, or the public decide on a case by case basis. If laws could be switched around willy nilly on a case by case basis it defeats the purpose. The correct legal approach is to have specific laws that LE, and public officials can be charged with (like corruption) because they're a part of government, which is how the laws already in place are intended to work. The problem isn't the laws, or the harshness of punishment administered, even though it seems like that's the only approach we can take. I have a feeling these sharia law like 1000% harsher approaches would have major unintended consequences, like judges, police, and legislators doing everything they can to not enforce unless the official being charged is a political target of other officials. If this harsh punishment approached worked, there wouldn't be prostitution, gambling, drugs, or alcohol during prohibition. The problem is the day to day approach and realities of working in government. It's the non profit approach, efficiency isn't even considered. It's the reliance of the DA on the LE officers to show up and make the effort to be convincing to testify during their cases, or they lose the case. The fact that there's almost always little to no oversight over the district attorneys, little to no oversight over the legislation, and little to no oversight over the LE departments is a consequence of having a system that assumes certain people are "more accountable" than others, which is a completely ludicrous assumption considering the blatant proof they're actually being held less accountable. This attitude is no doubt left over from a system where government (the crown) was put into place by "divine intervention".
  8. Mercer

    A.C.A.B.

    This is the flaw, it's hard to recognize because we've been conditioned our entire lives to ignore this obvious flaw in our system. Since the beginning of time it's been hierarchical whereas you don't question authority, and authority figures are supposedly "more accountable" which makes absolutely no sense. First it was the Pharos, Emperors, Kings, and now it's elected officials. Somehow their sociopathic quest for power and ability to win an election makes them more "accountable". Lol, this same hierarchical view is extended to LE, like we need them to be a step above the rest, and unquestionable or the entire system will fail which is nonsense. Police are, and always will be humans like the rest of us. While you may be able to screen for some flaws like any other employer exercising due diligence would, you can't expect them to be anything less than flawed even after screening. It's not just this flawed assumption they're "more accountable" whatever that's supposed to mean, the mechanism needed to apply this accountability is almost nonexistent. Think what it would actually be like to be a cop. You deal with scum regularly, and your fellow officers are the only ones that have your back, and you've got their back, and you're all out there risking your asses every day on what has to be a very tough job. There's absolutely no way you'd be inclined to turn one of them in for something. Sure, it does happen here and there, and there's a little bit accountability, but it's less accountability than what a civilian would face. Be honest, could you see yourself snitching on one of your homies unless it was for something pathological, or absolutely heinous? Fuck no. Now imagine you're protecting each other's lives on a daily basis. All this bullshit you see today about civil unrest, people taking knees, etc. and a (bewildering to some) hatred of LE stems from both this false assumption of infallibility, and people who hate freedom, making bullshit laws that force LE to enforce victimless crimes. This is why the system is fucked, and has such low confidence.
  9. Mercer

    A.C.A.B.

    This is pretty amazing.
  10. Chunky tattoo girl is gonna get and S from me dog.
  11. Mercer

    A.C.A.B.

    So what does this mean? Should they get double So what does this higher degree of accountability mean? Should they get double, triple the punishment a civilian gets? Should things that are legal for civilians be illegal for officers? How would we keep these crucial positions filled with qualified individuals if it's the officers that would face unfair treatment?
  12. Mercer

    A.C.A.B.

    Where are these supposed unflawed humans we should be seeking out then? This is why I'm not down with government. Wouldn't it just make more sense to assume all humans are flawed? I can show you the error in logic: People are bad, so we need a government made up of People are bad, so we need a government made up of People are bad, so we need a government made up of People are bad, so we need a government made up of People.... Nope, I'm suggesting holding officers to the exact same accountability as everyone else without privilege. Also, I know it's hard to but let's try to keep it civil, and not hurl insults at each other's beliefs. There's plenty I could say to insult, but I try to stick to a more civil tone. Besides, what you're falsely implying I think "there shouldn't be any rules for either police, or civilians", which is the opposite of what I've suggested, and believe. Who's has faced negative consequences from his actions, or anyone else's actions from simply passing out in a car? For a crime to take place, you need a victim. I simply pointed out there was no direct harm done by him, or any other person who's ever found passed out in their car (unless they wrecked it before passing out). IMO Police should see if a passed out individual in a car needs help, and if not keep it moving and maybe look for someone directly harming others (criminals). I don't, unfortunately. You can't spend your way out of this problem, it's been tried. This system is already throwing too much money at LE now when you factor in civil suits, pensions, department costs, etc. What we do know for sure isn't working right now is having a separate, almost non-existent justice system just for them, and that can be applied to the highest/lowest compensated LE officers and departments. To assume you can just spend your way out of all these problems disregards the value of efficiency, and ignores reality. I mean if it were as simple as spending more money on recruiting, training, and community rapport building the problem would have solved itself by now. Again, you're twisting my words to create a false narrative to argue against. I never said there's anything that justifies criminal actions by anyone. I was pointing out the reason why officer's aren't fired when they should be, not condoning it. You really think I feel that way, really? I'm 100% about accountability of LE as a solution. It boils down to any violation of the non aggression principal makes a person a criminal, and that person should face consequences for that violation. I should probably do the same this weekend. So there's at least something we can agree on.
  13. Mercer

    A.C.A.B.

    That was a little harsh, what I should say is anyone on his department should be shot in self defense for that, since it's not entirely his fault.
  14. Mercer

    A.C.A.B.

    In that case it's wrong to not charge him, and he should be shot in self defense if he ever attempted to kidnap another motorist for doing the same.
  15. Smash the redhead until that pussy squirts ginger ale everywhere.
  16. Mercer

    A.C.A.B.

    @Fist 666I hear you, but simply saying they should be "held to higher standards", and actually holding them to higher standards are 2 separate things. This all circles back to the fact they are all flawed human beings, and instead of relying on a system that ignores this fact in pursuit of some ideal situation, the system should be set up to account for this reality. The biggest hurdle to holding them accountable is amount of training invested in an individual LE officer. It can vary based on jurisdiction, and the time they've been on the force, but in many cases the dollar cost for training can exceed 6 figures within the first few years, and can take years to get through. This amount of investment is the reason why the people administrating LE departments can rarely afford to fire one outside of their first year or two. This is why it's worth it for them to swallow a $250,000 law suit here and there, rather than just fire an officer. They're just not that easily, or even possible to replace in most cases. Granted there are also the legal costs of the officer suing if they're fired, and police Unions involved when you try to fire one, but the main reason they're not easily disposed of, and often times end up on other departments is this massive investment into the individual LE officers. I've already given my opinions on how the force should be privatized, I'd like to just pay a small fee for insurance as opposed to taxes, and have a local security/insurance force of my choosing at my disposal should the need arise. Since a private company wouldn't be granted an automatic monopoly, their services would be superior. Likewise since there wouldn't be this assumed "higher accountability" because they're just citizens like everyone else, the accountability would be built in, just like it is for all non LE officers/citizens out there doing their thing. Snapping your fingers and saying cops should be perfect doesn't work, and is meaningless. It's the same reality we face when politicians tell us we're declaring all health "a right". The number of doctors, nurses, and hospital beds doesn't automatically increase at the snap of a finger to increase the amount of health care that can be administered. What happens is the quality of care has to be lowered to meet increased demand, and wait times for procedures have to be increased. I mean technically if it's a "right" we would need to enslave healthcare workers to 16 hour shifts meet the demand, otherwise by taking time off they're violating someone's rights. These utopian pursuits that ignore reality, like refusing to factoring in LE will always be comprised by flawed human beings is a dead end, and does nothing to defeat the problem. If we pretend we're shocked when it's revealed they're flawed human beings, and fire officers for inconsequential actions we'll have a shortage. To account for this we could increase wages to meet the demand, but the fact is most people aren't cut out for this work, and those wages would need to be ridiculously high to entice more people into this line of work, thus driving up taxes, and wages in the competitive job markets this would draw from. Most officers are already paid well above average to account for this higher standard. Again, this situation makes me question the logic of arresting anyone for getting drunk, and passing out in their car. To me, this is a no brainer, of course they shouldn't be arrested, and it would be up to their work whether or not it's worth it to fire them, and make arrangements to hire/train someone else. I can't believe I'm defending a cop not getting fucked over in an A.C.A.B. thread I started, but it makes sense considering I hold logical consistency in such high regards.
  17. For sure butterface smash, but never tell anyone.
  18. Pizzy coming through with the fresh cheese shred flex.
  19. @Dirty_habiTyea, he knows how to fix some obscure tool from Japan and the history behind the factory and the engineered the motor for the tool, and the life story of the engineer that designed it. Crazy classical music and great jokes to boot.
  20. Ave is one of my favorite you tubers From a while ago if we’re talking about the same guy @Dirty_habiTCanadian guy that does tear downs of tools and stuff?
×
×
  • Create New...