The Police Brutality Thread

[myboynoah]

What's the big deal? Ignore these kids. Eventually they'll need to go to the bathroom.

[Bo Diddley]

WTH? Public message boards are a form of social media. By any definition.

The police brutality outrage movement is a classic form of modern public shaming. And let's be honest, it is nothing more than good old-fashioned mob justice. And as was the case with the old-timey pitchfork and torch crowds, sometimes the target is guilty and sometimes the target is innocent.

While hyperbole (let's be honest, at least today they're not going to die or be physically harmed), you make a good point. It's when people want to jump on the wagon with everyone else to show that they're in step with the prevailing winds that things get out of control. In this instance, the officer was fired very quickly. No doubt that was to appease public opinion.

The power that police receive come from the people. It is a sacred trust. They need to be held accountable when they use that power unjustly. They also deserve our respect and appreciation when they use it justly.

So when you perceive a police officer to be using excessive force, what should you do? Keep it to yourself and let the process work itself out? Before social media, I believe that most misconduct was swept under the carpet. I think we're seeing a watershed moment for law enforcement, and I think the changes to come favor civil liberties.

[Jeff Lebowski]

While hyperbole (let's be honest, at least today they're not going to die or be physically harmed), you make a good point. It's when people want to jump on the wagon with everyone else to show that they're in step with the prevailing winds that things get out of control. In this instance, the officer was fired very quickly. No doubt that was to appease public opinion.

The power that police receive come from the people. It is a sacred trust. They need to be held accountable when they use that power unjustly. They also deserve our respect and appreciation when they use it justly.

So when you perceive a police officer to be using excessive force, what should you do? Keep it to yourself and let the process work itself out? Before social media, I believe that most misconduct was swept under the carpet. I think we're seeing a watershed moment for law enforcement, and I think the changes to come favor civil liberties.

Public shaming via the internet has totally altered the dynamics for issues such as police brutality. In some ways that is good, right? As the saying goes, the best disinfectant is sunshine. However, in most of these cases the response is overwhelmingly altered by public backlash and often people are fired and careers are ruined in situations that would be handled more fairly and more equitably at a local level, given a more complete and more systematic analysis of the facts and evidence.

To get a proper sense of how the internet has reinstated vigilante justice, I highly recommend the following book:

http://www.amazon.com/So-Youve-Been-...=UTF8&qid=&sr=

We have discussed it here a time or two. Read this book and you will be forever reluctant to jump on the social media outrage bandwagon. From the book description:

For the past three years, Jon Ronson has travelled the world meeting recipients of high-profile public shamings. The shamed are people like us - people who, say, made a joke on social media that came out badly, or made a mistake at work. Once their transgression is revealed, collective outrage circles with the force of a hurricane and the next thing they know they're being torn apart by an angry mob, jeered at, demonized, sometimes even fired from their job.
A great renaissance of public shaming is sweeping our land. Justice has been democratized. The silent majority are getting a voice. But what are we doing with our voice? We are mercilessly finding people's faults. We are defining the boundaries of normality by ruining the lives of those outside it. We are using shame as a form of social control.

[wuapinmon]

WTH? Public message boards are a form of social media. By any definition.

The police brutality outrage movement is a classic form of modern public shaming. And let's be honest, it is nothing more than good old-fashioned mob justice. And as was the case with the old-timey pitchfork and torch crowds, sometimes the target is guilty and sometimes the target is innocent.

CUF is social media in the same way that my writings here are literature.

I think the accusation of lynch mob mentality in this case is facile. I see a clear instance of brutality and unnecessary force. You do not. That's fine; argue with me about the nuances of force, when and where he was alright and where he was not. But, you see nothing wrong, so you summarily dismiss my feelings as irrelevant. The tone of this conversation, mostly by spalpeens, has been one of "wuap's a <redacted> <redacted>" instead of why it's not brutality. I have said why I believe it is.

I'm perfectly fine with the authorities taking their time to see what really happened, but to say that me coming here and sparking a conversation about what I see as an abuse of civil rights is me joining a lynch mob carrying a torch and trying to hang someone is facile. No dissenting opinions allowed, eh? No ability to express outrage when you see it or injustice when you feel it happened? Is this site run by John Dehlin now?

[myboynoah]

CUF is social media in the same way that my writings here are literature.

I think the accusation of lynch mob mentality in this case is facile. I see a clear instance of brutality and unnecessary force. You do not. That's fine; argue with me about the nuances of force, when and where he was alright and where he was not. But, you see nothing wrong, so you summarily dismiss my feelings as irrelevant. The tone of this conversation, mostly by spalpeens, has been one of "wuap's a <redacted> <redacted>" instead of why it's not brutality. I have said why I believe it is.

I'm perfectly fine with the authorities taking their time to see what really happened, but to say that me coming here and sparking a conversation about what I see as an abuse of civil rights is me joining a lynch mob carrying a torch and trying to hang someone is facile. No dissenting opinions allowed, eh? No ability to express outrage when you see it or injustice when you feel it happened? Is this site run by John Dehlin now?

Oh man, tell me you didn't go there.

[old_gregg]

CUF is social media in the same way that my writings here are literature.

I think the accusation of lynch mob mentality in this case is facile. I see a clear instance of brutality and unnecessary force. You do not. That's fine; argue with me about the nuances of force, when and where he was alright and where he was not. But, you see nothing wrong, so you summarily dismiss my feelings as irrelevant. The tone of this conversation, mostly by spalpeens, has been one of "wuap's a <redacted> <redacted>" instead of why it's not brutality. I have said why I believe it is.

I'm perfectly fine with the authorities taking their time to see what really happened, but to say that me coming here and sparking a conversation about what I see as an abuse of civil rights is me joining a lynch mob carrying a torch and trying to hang someone is facile. No dissenting opinions allowed, eh? No ability to express outrage when you see it or injustice when you feel it happened? Is this site run by John Dehlin now?

an abuse of civil rights? give me a break

[TripletDaddy]

Oh man, tell me you didn't go there.

he also called us spalpeens

[myboynoah]

he also called us spalpeens

I know. That doesn't even make sense. Our peens are far from spal.

[Bo Diddley]

Oh man, tell me you didn't go there.

This is most certainly a permutation of Godwin's Law. Whether the force was excessive seems irrelevant at this point. I think Wuap loses. Can I get a ruling?

[Jeff Lebowski]

CUF is social media in the same way that my writings here are literature.

Dude, we are FB friends. I have seen your discussions. They are often interesting, but your sphere of influence there isn't dramatically different than this forum. And for the sake of what we are discussing, the distinction between the two is moot.

I think the accusation of lynch mob mentality in this case is facile. I see a clear instance of brutality and unnecessary force. You do not. That's fine; argue with me about the nuances of force, when and where he was alright and where he was not. But, you see nothing wrong, so you summarily dismiss my feelings as irrelevant. The tone of this conversation, mostly by spalpeens, has been one of "wuap's a <redacted> <redacted>" instead of why it's not brutality. I have said why I believe it is.

I'm perfectly fine with the authorities taking their time to see what really happened, but to say that me coming here and sparking a conversation about what I see as an abuse of civil rights is me joining a lynch mob carrying a torch and trying to hang someone is facile. No dissenting opinions allowed, eh? No ability to express outrage when you see it or injustice when you feel it happened? Is this site run by John Dehlin now?

Clearly you and I have a different opinion regarding the impact of public shaming on cases like this. When you say "I'm perfectly fine with the authorities taking their time to see what really happened, but...", do you honestly think that these cases are processed fairly once they blow up nationally? Seriously?

Second, you have not been silenced in any way. Please continue to speak up on whatever topic you wish. Feel free to continue to highlight police abuse and I will feel free to occasionally critique such debates as gross overreactions and instances of online mob justice.

Finally, John Dehlin? That's hilarious.

[Topper]

CUF is social media in the same way that my writings here are literature.

I think the accusation of lynch mob mentality in this case is facile. I see a clear instance of brutality and unnecessary force. You do not. That's fine; argue with me about the nuances of force, when and where he was alright and where he was not. But, you see nothing wrong, so you summarily dismiss my feelings as irrelevant. The tone of this conversation, mostly by spalpeens, has been one of "wuap's a <redacted> <redacted>" instead of why it's not brutality. I have said why I believe it is.

I'm perfectly fine with the authorities taking their time to see what really happened, but to say that me coming here and sparking a conversation about what I see as an abuse of civil rights is me joining a lynch mob carrying a torch and trying to hang someone is facile. No dissenting opinions allowed, eh? No ability to express outrage when you see it or injustice when you feel it happened? Is this site run by John Dehlin now?

To me, the evaluation process should be meticulous and take the time necessary to arrive at a result as just as possible. Social media often jumps on the first discernible set of facts without a clear understanding what happened. Conversely, there is the possibility that without social media shining the light on incidents some examinations would not take place. So it's a mixed bag all in all.

[imanihonjin]

Dude, we are FB friends. I have seen your discussions. They are often interesting, but your sphere of influence there isn't dramatically different than this forum. And for the sake of what we are discussing, the distinction between the two is moot.



Clearly you and I have a different opinion regarding the impact of public shaming on cases like this. When you say "I'm perfectly fine with the authorities taking their time to see what really happened, but...", do you honestly think that these cases are processed fairly once they blow up nationally? Seriously?

Second, you have not been silenced in any way. Please continue to speak up on whatever topic you wish. Feel free to continue to highlight police abuse and I will feel free to occasionally critique such debates as gross overreactions and instances of online mob justice.

Finally, John Dehlin? That's hilarious.

Dude, JL, you are just asking wuap to turn of the lights and wait for you to take a piss. Think about that before responding, would you?

[Omaha 680]

JL is making a lot of sense these past couple pages. If any of you havent read that Publicly Shamed book you need to do it. It's a quick read and a very important perspective for the information age.

[Green Monstah]

For those defending this dude, do you think he handled it the "right" way, or was his behavior simply justifiable under all relevant circumstances? Do you think your opinion would change if it were your daughter?

[Jeff Lebowski]

For those defending this dude, do you think he handled it the "right" way, or was his behavior simply justifiable under all relevant circumstances? Do you think your opinion would change if it were your daughter?

FTR, I am not defending the guy. It appears that some kid was behaving like an idiot and a school cop got physical trying to remove her. Fine, let the principal and the police supervisor sort it out.