It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

I Have a Simple Solution To Stop Police Brutality

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 05:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Grovit

Why don't we just go for equal justice instead?




posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: semperfortis

Yep. There's a reason they are called law ENFORCEMENT officers. Sure, they're public servants and peace officers, but first and foremost a cop's job is to enforce the laws as written.

Did I get that right semper?



posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 05:11 PM
link   
And who watches the ones who control the demerit system? Who watches the ones who watch the watchers? Bribery and passes are very powerful when it comes to getting people to look the other way. There's no perfect system of justice.



posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 05:15 PM
link   
a reply to: IntastellaBurst

This is a tall order but I know what would stop it in its tracks. Free lawyers. Allowing the justice system to be a part of capitalism is the reason.
edit on 6-12-2014 by FlySolo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: IntastellaBurst

Not a bad idea. It's not like the current judicial system really works well. Justice is a bit of a scam in my mind.

But I see police brutality and corruption as a symptom of a much greater issue. Our society is sick, so no symptom will really go away forever until we learn to fix what is truly broken.

And it isn't the police. We would all likely do what the rank and file is currently doing if this was the system we were forced to survive in as well. I'm sure many would think they never would, but I could almost guarantee you would. Peer pressure is one thing, cultural entrenchments are another.

Your demerit point idea falls apart when people find a way to corrupt that system. And people will. Given the competitive and hostile nature of our current society.

Personally I believe all of the major issues stem from socioeconomic stratification. Money isn't real, so why divide ourseleves with it? It clearly isn't tied to anything real. So why cling to it? Again, money not being real, just disconnects everyone from the reality of truth that we indeed do have finite resources on this planet. We all can't be millionaires. At the rate we are going...I can't see this money BS keeping it real too much longer anyways.

Kudos for efforts in trying to find a workable solution to a massive conundrum. I think about it every day.



posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Most excellently




posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 05:17 PM
link   
Cops are just a reflection to the environment in which they work. That is the reason I do not live in a place like Ferguson.



posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero
Cops are just a reflection to the environment in which they work. That is the reason I do not live in a place like Ferguson.



i think that is actually very true



posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

Finally someone who gets it.

I don't remember seeing Andy Griffith commit acts of brutality.



posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Again.. You are laboring under either a lack of information or false information..

There is NO contract other than the oath a police officer takes and that oath is to "Enforce the laws.. Etc Etc"

NOT serve and protect...

Also you are quite wrong in that one SCOTUS ruling is NOT law

It is the very essence of law..



posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 05:28 PM
link   
a reply to: semperfortis

www.policechiefmagazine.org...

The federal constitution also doesn't cover or say a lot of other things that are bound by state or local laws or contracts.

However, if your literal interpretation and twisted use of this ruling is that it created a new federal law, the ruling that the constitution does not cover something, then take the damn words off all the cars and mottos and get all the public relations people out there into the communities and tell them you're not there to help. Because that's all lies.

ETA: Many, many laws are there to protect people, and those enforcing laws that protect people are in essence protecting people.

What the ruling in the SCOTUS case means is that the police have no constitutional duty to protect and so there can be no constitutional ruling you if you sue at the federal level saying they violated constitutional rights by not protecting someone. But you may still have legal recourse to sue police at the local or state level for failure to act, depending on those laws and contracts.
edit on 12/6/2014 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 05:35 PM
link   
r

Yes, I know corruption is one obstacle, perhaps demerits could be handled by a volunteer community board ??

As bad as the system is, anything to make people accountable is a step in the right direction.

Perhaps its time for the people to police the police if they cannot do it impartialy.
edit on 6-12-2014 by IntastellaBurst because: police got to me



posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 05:42 PM
link   
One last Constitutional question, and I'm done with this SCOTUS nonsense. What does the Constitution or SCOTUS say police are constitutionallly bound to do?

And what is in the oath of service and or honor that most law enforcement officials take. And mean.

ETA: Now I'm done.With my opinion.
edit on 12/6/2014 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 05:58 PM
link   
a reply to: IntastellaBurst





Police forget, they are meant to serve and protect US, the people


Wrong wrong wrong......learn things before you post.

Understand the roll of the Police officer and who they work for!!



posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 06:00 PM
link   
a reply to: IntastellaBurst

How about cooperate with the police? What a novel idea. rolleyes



posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 06:04 PM
link   
a reply to: IntastellaBurst

I'm sorry but we already have a way to prevent police brutality and its called the LAW. Unfortunately this is only after the fact but if the LAW is supposed to be a deterrent to criminals, then why would it not be a deterrent to police officers who over step the line ? Assault is assault and a demerit just doesn't cut it and murder is murder, manslaughter is just that. If I hit a peace officer then I am arrested and charged with assault, most likely depending on my color, whether I pay for an attorney etc, I will pay a fine, get probation or go to jail.

The facts of the matter are that police are often protected by powerful unions, as well as the municipalities they work for as well as often protected by the Blue Line. The municipalities want to protect them because to do otherwise would mean liabilities which cost them money and lots of it.

I guess other than filing charges direct instead of asking a Grand Jury to come back with a bill so the case case could proceed direct to trail would be another step in the right direction. I have been arrested and didn't benefit from a Grand Jury proceeding, it went direct to trail as I was charged period, and they lost by the way.

The LAW is the answer, it just needs to be applied without people worried about lawsuits instead of justice for everyone. Demerits is just an invitation to keep business as usual.



posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 06:12 PM
link   
a reply to: DJMSN

The law doesnt work, and hasnt worked,

This system is not neccesarily to enforce rules being broken, but to Remove habitualy bad officers.

They cant police themselves, its ludicrous to think so.


Also,

I made a huge edit to the original post which expands on this idea more.

Lets keep those ideas rollin



posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Sigh..

1. It is NOT my interpretation, it is the Supreme Court's
2. NO you can NOT then sue at state or local level as The Supreme Court decisions are what THAT law is based on
3. The oath an officer takes is to "Uphold the law" etc etc..




posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 06:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: semperfortis
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Sigh..

1. It is NOT my interpretation, it is the Supreme Court's
2. NO you can NOT then sue at state or local level as The Supreme Court decisions are what THAT law is based on
3. The oath an officer takes is to "Uphold the law" etc etc..



1. It was a ruling on a case that someone took federal after they lost locally and/or at the state level. ruling on based on their interpretations of the law at the constitutional (federal) level. The Constitution doesn't say law enforcement is there to protect. It also doesn't say it isn't.
2. I did not say THEN sue. See above.
3. Mmmhmm.

Sigh.

And again, what does the Constitution have to say about what law enforcement is supposed to do?
edit on 12/6/2014 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2014 @ 07:08 PM
link   
a reply to: ~Lucidity

You obviously have no idea how the system works and I can not teach you here..

I will try and educate some...

The Constitution does not ever address any specifics as far as Law Enforcement goes.. That is what the SUPREME COURT is for.. To interpret law as it applies to the Constitution.

There are 3 branches of govenment

Legislative.. (Congress and Senate etc)
Judicial.. (Courts including SCOTUS)
Executive.. (Including Law Enforcement)

When a court decision comes down that someone is unhappy with, prosecution or defense, it can be appealed. The higher courts will look at the evidence and make a ruling, then off to the Appellate courts and finally, IF they decide to hear it, The Supreme Court will make a ruling...

Once the Supreme Court makes their ruling, it becomes LAW and the standard by which all subsequent rulings must be based upon..




new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join