zlacker

Would you report your fellow in company that e.g. goes late to work? Or uses corporate assets (printer, laptop) for personal things?

This is similar, if you know someone you have less incentive to report on one.

The better you know them, the higher is the bar for reporting.

>>krzyk+(OP)
I would report someone in my company who attacked someone else with no provocation. Or murdered someone.

I don't think this comparison is as good as you think it is.

>>krzyk+(OP)
No, someone showing up late to work and someone else violently beating or murdering a citizen is not the same thing. At all.

Those two scenarios are so far apart, attempting to draw a comparison is disturbing.

>>deathc+J3
Would you tell on your loved one, good friend, and/or favorite cousin if they attacked someone? What if you could rationalize what they did? What if you told on them and that meant turning your back on the rest of your family and them all shunning you, or hurting and harassing you?

I think we need some massive overhauling of how accountability works in police situations and I think that will have to start with shit rolling uphill.

>>setham+Ue
Oh no, I fully agree with you - in a normal organisation that respects operating according to the burden of responsibility placed on it, reporting these things would be a duty. As things stand, it is seen as betrayal of the 'brotherhood' which is why it needs to be brought down.

>>krzyk+(OP)
> Would you report your fellow in company that e.g. goes late to work? Or uses corporate assets (printer, laptop) for personal things?

If I reported that someone is using corporate assets (printer, laptop) for personal things, my manager would consider me crazy. If I reported someone being bit late, it would be the same.

That is exactly the culture thing. The corporate printer or laptop being used is not being seen as an issue by me, you or anybody else, regardless of what official rules say.

>>deathc+Tf
We agree. I was pointing out how it is different than if you saw it at the office. The brotherhood term is very relevant. Not sure why I was downvoted.

>>ashton+98
OK, let me make it more clear.

Let's assume two cases:

1. A programmer, his work involves programming (obvious), going to meetings, printing some reports/codes etc.

The biggest problem he can do is introduce bugs in code by mistake (yes, lives can be lost that way), would you expect his peers to tell on him that he was the guy that introduced a bug that killed 300 people in a plane crash?

2. A cop, his job involves preventing crimes, event violent ones, so he sometimes need to use his gun to prevent some of it, and sometimes he has to shoot a criminal.

His mistakes might be killing innocent person. Same thing can happen to his colleagues, so they protect him (just like any sane community would, like your family) - at least unless he turns out to be some sick sociopath.

Do you see relevance now? If you play with code you can just break code, if you play with guns you can break lives.

A side from that I don't get it why there are so many people that trash cops, but don't say a bad word about looters.

Cops protect us from crimes, small and big. They provide order, there are always black sheep, but there are less of those than you think - good guys also make mistakes.

Without a force that provides protection from crimes we would turn into vendetta like justice - have you been to countries that just went out of war? e.g. after the fall of Yugoslavia, there was no police there only tribe and vendetta justice.

Each utopia turns into dystopia sooner or later (CHAZ).

>>krzyk+9B1
Your example excludes intent.

If I thought my coworker had deliberately introduced a bug that killed 300 people, I would absolutely turn them in. There is absolutely no question in my mind that I would do that.

But cops do not turn in their own when they deliberately abuse their power. They in fact resign in protest when their own are investigated (Buffalo, NY), and turn out in support when their own are arraigned for abuses of power (Philadelphia, PA).

>>ashton+7J1
Intent is not obvious, unless you have evidence and that is to court to prove, beyond any reasonable doubt.

Intent to kill is something a sociopath does, do you think police force has more of them than the rest of society?

There was a time when vigilant justice didn't need court, but I don't think we want that to return (witch hunts in middle ages or lynching in 19th and early 20th century USA).

>>krzyk+1O2
> Intent to kill is something a sociopath does, do you think police force has more of them than the rest of society?

Actually, yes, they are filled with sociopaths. It's well known that lower-intelligence people become police. The police actively reject candidates with higher intelligence because the theory is that they become bored.

Also, it's well known that the occupation attracts bullies, who love the idea of bullying people and having power over regular citizens.

What you end up having is a group of low-IQ bullies, and they control the entire police force, because the "good" cops don't want to rock the boat. The stupid, boisterous bullies are the ones that create the culture of silence and complicity, and ultimately violence. I believe that cops love the idea that they are at war against the common citizen, which is why they draw their guns and escalate situations even before anything has happened.

>>setham+Ue
This is the problem. The family should reject the violent individual and turn in the person as a collective.

If the police were genuinely "good", they would act as a unit and reject the bad ones. In fact, the opposite happens, and they keep silent when bad cops commit crimes, and they reject the good ones who try to actually try to be good.

This is the culture that needs to be destroyed and rebuilt.

>>jennyy+yR3
> It's well known that lower-intelligence people become police.

Any data?

> Also, it's well known that the occupation attracts bullies, who love the idea of bullying people and having power over regular citizens.

Again, data? Isn't it easier to become crook? More pay, less control, more freedom.

I know they are not PhDs but come on.

What you are doing is exactly the same what others do to different races/genders/nationalities, just replace "police" in your sentences with "black", "yellow", "women", "jewish" etc.

Hate against whole occupation, thousands of people. People start poisoning them (have you seen what happened in NY?), their children are bullied at schools.

Pure and simple hate crime.