> Unfortunately, it seems the ROE of American occupation forces in Afghanistan is more civilian-friendly than the ROE of American cops

You had me until race war but yes. This is true in my exp.

Related question – a relatively high percentage (~20%) of police officers are ex-military. It does seem that military ROE is more stringent than what we've seen from recent evidence of problems in police/citizen interactions. Do you think there is a cultural problem within police departments that engenders a weakening of discipline wrt use of force? Or is it just that the problems that occur domestically in the US get more coverage, and the rate of misapplied state violence is similar?

Ex-military is not ex-combat veteran. Having been adequately trained for and employed in the use of deadly force (vs. refueling trucks or counting bullets) are two very different things. 1 in 10 soldiers are actually in a combat job.

It all comes down to training and experience. Police training budgets are tight, officers roll in single squad cars (little safety), sometimes physical fitness standards aren't upheld (fat cops can't scrap with someone they have to use a device to subdue them), and mental health issues abound (the job can be quite stressful and boring at the same time).

I've watched a lot of body cam footage of (legitimate) police shootings. I wonder how many of these one on one situations would have turned violent if the perp knew there were two officers bearing down on him instead of one?

I remember hearing an NPR piece about how combat veterans were _less_ likely to shoot than others. Wish I had a link...

The drug war has always been a cultural and class war, and of course it cuts along racial lines, as well as political ones. Not nonsense at all.

https://youtu.be/sXPOw2unxy0?t=238