Video emerges of woman 911 caller forcefully strip searched in police custody

Originally posted by Hal9000
reply to post by verylowfrequency

 

reply to post by eyewitness86

 

People like you want to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Yes this video shows problems and I am as appalled as anyone, but I also know what would happen if the cops did not do the difficult work that they do everyday. It would not take long for anarchy to take over.

Yes they overstepped their bonds in this case, so let's FIX the problem. Don't ruin our entire society over it.

Too late, society is already ruined. You think this is an isolated incident? A woman calls for help, and ends up getting all but raped by the ones she is confiding in?

Anarchy would be a much better situation, do you know why? Because we would be responsible for our own well being, thus forging alliances of a tribal nature and really have a "common good" inside the group.

Keep in mind that laws are only there to allow for a stable power strucutre. This was started by the Lombards after they had generations upon generations of wars aimed at usurping power. So they enacted laws, which allowed disputes to be settled at a very low level, never allowing Collective Bargaining by the families of the ones involved, thus maintaining power.

I say Anarchy is so much better than what we have today. Sure it would be less peaceful, but is sitting in a cube staring at a monitor, waiting for the LEO's to come violate you really that good of an alternative?

Originally posted by Quazga
This makes me so mad I want to scream

[snip]

[edit on 5-2-2008 by Quazga]

Mods wanna pick up on this one...seems to break a few laws, and doesn't do the rest of us any good by association, eh?


Mod Edit - removed quoted post.

[edit on 5-2-2008 by elevatedone]

Originally posted by Quazga Anarchy would be a much better situation, do you know why? Because we would be responsible for our own well being, thus forging alliances of a tribal nature and really have a "common good" inside the group.

Lord knows, it's workin' out pretty good in Kenya. Got any more great examples where a lack of the rule of law is working out? Somalia? Serbia had a good groove goin' on a while back. Tribalism at it's most functional.

There is absolutely NO society anywhere at any time that functioned better w/out some type of law and order in place. If there is, Id love for someone to show us that society. But I dont think one has ever existed.

Eventually, a natural "what is good vs. what is bad" would take place. SOMEONE would end up being in charge and holding the bad people accountable. As would someone would stand up and let the bad people run amuck.

It is absolutely ridiculous to brand an entire group based on the actions of some. There is no logic behind that - at all.

Should the bad ones be held accountable? Absolutely yes, if they are in fact guilty of something.

And just like some people here are claiming that those working "in the system" are biased....the same can be said about those who have been a part of the system in the opposite sense. Some people here hate cops because they have been arrested or because they had a bad experience.

I have had nothing but positive experiences with cops. Even when they have issued me tickets for speeding...and some other situations I was in (in my teen years), though nothing that I was in trouble for.


Yep, I have had nothing but positive experiences. However, that doesn't skew my perception that there are in deed bad cops.


[edit on 5-2-2008 by greeneyedleo]

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by Quazga Anarchy would be a much better situation, do you know why? Because we would be responsible for our own well being, thus forging alliances of a tribal nature and really have a "common good" inside the group.

Lord knows, it's workin' out pretty good in Kenya. Got any more great examples where a lack of the rule of law is working out? Somalia? Serbia had a good groove goin' on a while back. Tribalism at it's most functional.

Yeah thats what happens at first, thats just the withdrawl society goes through after being doped up on the opiates of religion and democracy.

let Anarchy stew a while, and you will definitely see self-organizing principles at work. It's the free market man!

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
There is absolutely NO society anywhere at any time that functioned better w/out some type of law and order in place. If there is, Id love for someone to show us that society. But I dont think one has ever existed.


[edit on 5-2-2008 by greeneyedleo]

First... Define "Function"

Second, Check out the Native American Tribes. You'll find plenty of lawlessness which "functioned" quite well.

reply to post by Quazga


So, the Native American tribes had absolutely no laws and nobody to enforce them? People could do as they wanted with no recourse?

Really? I was completely unaware of this.

I wonder why they have laws and law enforcement now?

[edit on 5-2-2008 by greeneyedleo]

Originally posted by Quazga
let Anarchy stew a while, and you will definitely see self-organizing principles at work. It's the free market man!

One example would be nice...and as to defining native american society as lawless, perhaps one of our aboriginal brethren would care to comment?

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
reply to post by Quazga

 

So, the Native American tribes had absolutely no laws and nobody to enforce them? People could do as they wanted with no recourse?

Really? I was completely unaware of this.

I wonder why they have laws and law enforcement now?

[edit on 5-2-2008 by greeneyedleo]

First we have laws and law enforcement to maintain control for the leaders. This is why the Lombards adopted laws. Placing a cost on crimes reduced it greatly so leaders stopped getting assasinated every few years.

Secondly, yes in tribal situations there is often no personal responisibility but a collective one. Read about this in abnormal psychology text books.

Also in Cherokee tribes, if a member of a clan killed a member of another clan they had a concept we call "Corporate responsibility" which meant that the victim clan could kill any member of the attacking clan, even if it was an accident. And it doesn't matter who actually gets killed in the revenge.

Other than that, which doesn't really qualify as a law, no, no man can tell another what to do. Are there consequences? Yeah you hit me, I hit you back, thats the consequence.

Cherokees had two cheifs, one for external affairs (War Cheif) and one for Internal Affairs (Peace Chief). These were offices used to facilitate discussion and help the members of the tribe come to consensus. However, no man (or woman) was able to tell anyone else what they could or couldn't do.

What happens in a situation like this is that no one really get's too angry for long, and a relative peace exists.

This illusion you have that laws are the only way to a peaceful society is just another poison you've been fed by the slavemasters who wish to keep you that way.

reply to post by greeneyedleo


Again, just for information purposes...

Apparently upon reading, the Native American were perhaps even more strict than most Americans would tolerate..

When we talk about political structure, what we're really talking about is where authority lies in a community. Who makes decisions in a community? To what extent are members of the community obligated to obey those decisions? How is that authority justified?

There is no question that the bulk of Native American societies were formed around kinship groups and these kinship groups remained the core of almost all Native American societies even after they had developed into centralized political societies.

Chieftaincies were the most common political structure among Native Americans. A chieftaincy included more than one kinship group and often more than one local settlement or clan. The principal role of the chief was to resolve conflicts among groups; there developed beneath the chief an entire hierarchy of decision-making.

Cultures in America

They had a Supreme Leader in many aspects, either the Chief, or elder woman filled that role as the "final word" as it were...

Reading some of the varied material, one finds that banishment was common as a punishment and usually resulted in the members death. Corporal punishment was not uncommon either in many of the very diverse tribal structures..

Just for information..

Semper

Originally posted by Hal9000

People like you want to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Yes they overstepped their bonds in this case, so let's FIX the problem. Don't ruin our entire society over it.

Nope, we're just venting anger here - but I think to get the ball rolling to make changes we have to play the game in order to bring attention to it.

Terrorist blow up buildings - the media plays it over & over on the news in order to get a response from the people.

In this case we are both the media & the people. We are also the catalyst & possible the framers of an amicable solution.

I think it's clear as a society we're not going to let this behavior continue. Either we make changes to our laws and paint the lines for the dodo's to specifically follow and bring corrections & police in line with our standards of civilized behavior or we will begin to see eruptions of civil unrest created by and directed at those behaviorally corrupt organizations.

Reminds me of videos we see of Palestinian children throwing rocks at the Israelis cops - most the time the cops run or shoot rubber bullets, but sometimes they get fed up a kill people. Are we going to see people throwing rocks at police here in America. Hmm I wonder what they would do? The way things are now either kill them outright - claiming it was for my safety & he had a weapon, or beat them up and have the jailers tear their clothes off and humiliate them to the point that they feel worse than if they were gang raped on the side of the road. At least if a gang raped you on the side of the road you wouldn't have wake up in a cell & then instead of an empty wallet a permant record fines that go beyond that day including how much money you can make in the future.

I believe video cameras everywhere (except in your private living area) are in the long run a good thing. Cameras protect us all as long as we all have the same equal access to the data. When one group keeps the truth from another for their own selfish benefit - that's where the problem lies and it seems to be part of this case as well. Another words they can use the cameras against you for your bad behavior, but the tape isn't made available for you to use against them their behavior is unacceptable to society.

What I see in that video is the same mentality and manifestation of evil as what I saw in the LA Riots. It's easy for most of us whities to say "they're bad gangsters & they should all be in jail for acting like that", but it's not so easy when people we pay and represent us as a society are caught on tape doing the same as part of their job.

When I watched the trucker get beat by the gang in the LA Riots video - I become angry & wanted to do them in. I feel the same way watching the video tape of the jailers doing what they did to the woman. I didn't know the gangsters or the trucker, but I easily identified those doing evil. I didn't know the jailers or the woman & I easily identified the evil there. The gangsters have their argument and the jailers do too. As individuals they may not all be evil, but when brought together as a group for one purpose they became the disciples of the Devil himself.



[edit on 5-2-2008 by verylowfrequency]

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
There is absolutely NO society anywhere at any time that functioned better w/out some type of law and order in place. If there is, Id love for someone to show us that society. But I dont think one has ever existed.

Eventually, a natural "what is good vs. what is bad" would take place. SOMEONE would end up being in charge and holding the bad people accountable. As would someone would stand up and let the bad people run amuck.

It is absolutely ridiculous to brand an entire group based on the actions of some. There is no logic behind that - at all.

Should the bad ones be held accountable? Absolutely yes, if they are in fact guilty of something.

And just like some people here are claiming that those working "in the system" are biased....the same can be said about those who have been a part of the system in the opposite sense. Some people here hate cops because they have been arrested or because they had a bad experience.

I have had nothing but positive experiences with cops. Even when they have issued me tickets for speeding...and some other situations I was in (in my teen years), though nothing that I was in trouble for.


Yep, I have had nothing but positive experiences. However, that doesn't skew my perception that there are in deed bad cops.


[edit on 5-2-2008 by greeneyedleo]

I don't think you get paid enough. You should ask for a raise for being so see through.

Also the answer to your pondering is the animal kingdom. Beavers have dams, Foxes have holes, birds have nests, but none of them of governments
or law enforcement. Despite that they all seem to get along just fine.

In the human kingdom you can look to the inuits

Originally posted by verylowfrequency
I think it's clear as a society we're not going to let this behavior continue. Either we make changes to our laws and paint the lines for the dodo's to specifically follow and bring corrections & police in line with our standards of civilized behavior or we will begin to see eruptions of civil unrest created by and directed at those behaviorally corrupt organizations.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that...Bush's toying with your Constitution notwithstanding...the laws are in place, as they are in Canada and civilized countries everywhere. The question lies in whether or not they are being adequately enforced, and to that one must often look at the judiciary.

Originally posted by semperfortis
reply to post by greeneyedleo

 

Again, just for information purposes...

Apparently upon reading, the Native American were perhaps even more strict than most Americans would tolerate..

When we talk about political structure, what we're really talking about is where authority lies in a community. Who makes decisions in a community? To what extent are members of the community obligated to obey those decisions? How is that authority justified?

There is no question that the bulk of Native American societies were formed around kinship groups and these kinship groups remained the core of almost all Native American societies even after they had developed into centralized political societies.

Chieftaincies were the most common political structure among Native Americans. A chieftaincy included more than one kinship group and often more than one local settlement or clan. The principal role of the chief was to resolve conflicts among groups; there developed beneath the chief an entire hierarchy of decision-making.

Cultures in America

They had a Supreme Leader in many aspects, either the Chief, or elder woman filled that role as the "final word" as it were...

Reading some of the varied material, one finds that banishment was common as a punishment and usually resulted in the members death. Corporal punishment was not uncommon either in many of the very diverse tribal structures..

Just for information..

Semper

Actually, every tribe was different. However the Europeans actually thought these things about the Cherokee, but in reality it was false. Study the history of the Cherokee and you will learn about a man called the Cherokee Dragon by the Colonists but Dragging Canoe in his own tongue. They believed his father to be the emperor of the Cherokee. However, because there was no such thing, deals that was made with him were often not followed, because there were so many different cities in Cherokee country, and each city functioned as it's own independent unit. Cities could petition each other and make a plea for assistance, but it was up to each and every person whether or not they would comply.

The Cherokee had a clan called the Wolf Clan, and they were responsible for monitoring the borders. Yet, they had no internal law enforcement. Part of the reason for the Cherokee behavior is because at one point in Cherokee Ancient History there were a caste of priests who ruled over them. They abused the people to such a degree that one day, during a hunt, the priests went to a mans house and stole his wife. Upon returning, this man was so upset, and so many people also had experiences similar for so long, that it was the spark that caused a flame. They killed all the priests.

They continued to follow the beliefs and rituals of their traditions, but they never had authorities in that sense again.


This Series is an amazing set of books. I recommend it.

www.amazon.com...




[edit on 5-2-2008 by Quazga]

[edit on 5-2-2008 by Quazga]

Yeah definately terrible.

Do you think the original video is on the internet somewhere?

I have a few things I would like to add in here. First, I wore a shield up until last Summer. I was beaten and given more than ten high-power electric shocks on my own front porch by the local police department this past Autumn, when I told them I was not afraid of them. I am done being an apologist and making excuses for the rampant disregard of human dignity and Constitutional rights by law enforcement.

Secondly, everyone is failing to see the real problem here. And that is, these officers did not even realize they were doing wrong.

This is why they videotaped it. They were so worked up in their own minds that they failed to see reality. All they saw was "procedure." Any contact with law enforcement can end up like this, and quite often does.

Regardless of reality, right and wrong, your rights, your dignity, your best bet is to submit entirely to the will of the officer lest you be forced into a deeper and darker hole until you are broken.

reply to post by titorite


LMAO. Paid for what? Im a student and im a stay at home mom, stuck in the middle of Alaska (ask the MODs/Owners they can easily verify my IP addy location).

Wonder where my paycheck is and who its from?





[edit on 5-2-2008 by greeneyedleo]

A few more things I would like to add. Civilzation came a long way before the invention of the police officer, which happened in London less than two-hundred years ago. I am not an outright anarchist, and do believe there should be codes that communities follow, but I don't think we need cops armed to the teeth intruding into every aspect of our lives. There are people who are in such desperate financial straits that the cost of a traffic ticket could push them out on to the streets. I have seen it happen, and this is NOT justice.

Also, the police are not a very effective force of protection. They have very little investment in crime prevention. If you call them up right now worried that someone is coming to your house with a gun, they will tell you to call back when the gunman gets there. How many women have been murdered by men who they feared enough to go get that useless piece of paper called an order of protection.

Please don't misunderstand me, there is a lot of good that can be done by the police, and that is done by police. But what we have now is far from a force in place to serve the communitites of America. This is tyranny being carried out on a local level, by people who really belive they are doing good.

yeah so no word on the original video?

reply to post by Hal9000

It's funny, I think back to when Katrina hit New Orleans and then everyone was wonder where all the help was.

You bring up a good point. So why have them if they're not there when you need them? Because they are not there to serve the needs of the community, they are there to make money for the court system.

By the way, the courts have not enforced law since 1933. Since then they have been practicing public policy. Courts are actually operated for profit by sworn members of the private entity known as the BAR Association. The police departments are instruments of the dictates of public policy.