Re: Our Boys In Blue
Posted: Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:28 pm
I'm torn between "Wow that cop actually did the right thing!" and "WHITE OR NOT, HOW IN THE FUCK IS THAT GUY NOT DEAD?!"
Hold on to your butts.
How many people are killed by police every year in the United States? It depends on whom you ask.
The federal government tries to track this subset of the population with databases like the National Vital Statistics System, which is based on death certificates. As public attention on police violence has increased in recent years, media organizations began making databases of their own—like the Guardian's The Counted or the Washington Post's Fatal Force—to track law enforcement-related deaths. Comparisons between the data sets suggested that the official government data was severely undercounting police-related deaths. However, no one really knew how accurate those media databases were either.
Now, in a new study published today in PLoS Medicine, researchers borrowed techniques from wildlife ecology to estimate how many people are really killed by police officers in the U.S. They found that, while the media database The Counted documented roughly twice as many cases of police-related deaths than the NVSS, it still missed up to 7 percent of cases.
“Jokingly I said he was a suspected Storm Front member and I told him about the conversation I had with John Doe, and showed him the printed list of correspondence between “Krieger” and John Doe. Chief Deputy Gauger became extremely nervous, his mouth went dry and his completion became pale. I could see his jugular vein pulsing hard, like a person under enormous stress. He looked at me, ripped up the paper, and told me that I would not be filing a report on this incident. I was informed by Chief Deputy Gauger if I should report this incident or attempt to take any action, my career would be over and he would find a reason to put me in prison. “
Mongrel wrote:Sometimes I really do wonder if I really should just stop seeking and linking all this bad news and wallow in happy ignorance.
It wouldn't help, I suppose.
Mothra wrote:This story is weird. Only seeing it pop up on two other super sensationalist sites. Not sure if it's true.
But, definitely seems like the sort of thing that could be.
Approximately three-quarters of all homicide victims in America are killed by someone they know. And the real threat from strangers is quite different from what most fear: one-third of all Americans killed by strangers are killed by police.
What I stumbled upon was a Broward County law enforcement system in a state of conflict. The Broward County School Board and District Superintendent, entered into a political agreement with Broward County Law enforcement officials to stop arresting students for crimes.
The motive was simple. The school system administrators wanted to "improve their statistics" and gain state and federal grant money for improvements therein.
Initially the police were excusing misdemeanor behaviors. However, it didn't take long until felonies, even violent felonies (armed robberies, assaults and worse) were being excused.
Well it didn't take long for criminal gangs in Broward and Miami-Dade to realize the benefit of using students for their criminal activities. After all, the kids would be let go... so organized crime became easier to get away with if they enlisted high-school kids.
Lyndon wrote: The grant money goes to places with more reported crimes, not less.
School funding for education isn't going to look at crime at all. School funding for behavior/crime is going to go up with higher reporting. There isn't a combination of agencies and grants that would work like this is saying.
That isn't to say the scheme wasn't happening. I think it was and everything in that thread checks out for me EXCEPT the part about getting more money. That's a big assumption they're making. I would not be surprised to find that the DJJ money actually went down.school funding for education might look at like, graduation rate, which would be adversely impacted by arresting students?
Yeah but less than you would expect and in a very slow trend-based manner that doesn't fit the MO for the type of scheme being described. It sets off my fraud alarms but I don't think the writer has actually figured out who is benefiting and how yet.
Like they are describing a conspiracy between a bunch of cops wherein none of them individually benefit. The district benefits and the sheriff's office indirectly benefits, but the individual cops do not. So that's bullshit right there. You're missing the primary ingredient for fraud.
This person has done their analysis backwards. These big conspiracies, when they occur, grow organically out of individual people benefiting from something.
Somewhere nestled down in there is a nonprofit run by someone's brother. That's where it'll be, not some plan to get a tiny bit more state funding for a major metro area.