News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by dTal on Friday June 26, 2020 @08:47AM (#23651367)
Regarding this often-cited argument of "people can own guns, so cops need them" - in a situation with a gun, does it actually help if the cop also has a gun? Now you have a gunfight on your hands. By analogy, people are allowed to own rocket launchers as well (it's true!) but that doesn't mean every beat cop should carry one. What's the actual problem with disarming the police completely, and having them call in a SWAT team in the rare event that someone actually threatens a cop with a firearm?
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by PJDK on Friday June 26, 2020 @09:20AM (#23651629)
Just to extend on this - this is how it's done in the UK.

Specifically in London the regular police are not armed. Armed police patrol the city in cars - if you're in the city you can identify these cars as they have a big yellow spot on the windows and there is an officer in the back seat. The aim is to be able to respond to a request within 8 minutes.

During the London bridge attack the attackers were shot dead by armed police 9 minutes after the first call to the police.

Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by dmurray on Friday June 26, 2020 @09:36AM (#23651780)
This is also how it's done traditionally in Ireland, the regular police aren't armed but there is a "Special Branch" of detectives, usually plain clothes in unmarked cars.

Recently they've been sneakily expanding the use of armed police though. In Dublin, I see more and more cars marked "Armed Response Unit" which have regular cops with guns. And just last week a detective was shot and killed with his own gun while doing a traffic stop. There's been a massive PR blitz about how good a guy this cop was, but zero discussion about why the duties of armed police have now been extended to include road traffic policing. I suspect it's planned to arm more and more of them and I wouldn't be surprised if the British followed the same slippery slope.

Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by hef19898 on Friday June 26, 2020 @10:12AM (#23652160)
Yeah, that is something that always puzzled me. German police is armed, always. Seeing unarmed police always strikes me as strange.

Have to agree, so, that a gun not carried cannot be used.

Just out of curiosity, is police violence and discrimination a problem in Ireland? Outside of Northern Ireland, off course.

Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by anonymousDan on Friday June 26, 2020 @10:50AM (#23652589)
Not particularly, Irleand is a relatively homogeneous country. There has been an uptick in the last few years in drug gang related murders due to a feud between two pretty brutal drug cartels (the leader of one now controls an international cartel from Dubai and rather outrageously is the promoter behind the Tyson Fury Vs Anthony Joshua heavyweight boxing fight). I think this has probably lead to an increase in gun carrying by Gardai (Irish police service).
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by hef19898 on Friday June 26, 2020 @10:53AM (#23652620)
Thanks! Very interesting bit of information regarding the cartrlys and the Fury vs. Joshua fight.
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by rabanne on Friday June 26, 2020 @09:25AM (#23651677)
In 2018 and 2019, there were over 30,000 assaults on police officers in UK.[1] In 2017 and 2018, there were over 110,000 assults on police officers in US. You can't just adopt this in the US, policing is more dangerous in the US.

[1] https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2017 https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2018

[2] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by throwaway1239Mx on Friday June 26, 2020 @09:45AM (#23651899)
As of 2020, the US population is ~327000000. The UK population is 63000000 [Source: Wikipedia]

Now, do some division. That's ~1 assault on a LEO per 2990 people in the US and ~1 assault on a LEO per 2100 people in the UK.

So assaults on LEO per capita are 26% greater in the UK.

Of course, it is also important to look at the number of LEOs in each state (in the sense of country, not US state).

From [0] there are ~686000 LEO in the US, or 1 per 479 people. From [1], there are ~123000 LEO in the UK, or 1 per 512 people.

So there are 6% fewer LEO per capita in the UK than the US, but the assaults on LEOs happen 26% more often per capita.

So how is it more dangerous in the US again?

[Edit: forgot sources! my bad.]

[0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/191694/number-of-law-enf... Actually, https://www.bls.gov/ooh/protective-service/police-and-detect... suggests 808,000 LEO in the US, which makes the per-capita LEO even higher in the US. Population data is hard.

[1] https://fullfact.org/crime/police-numbers/

Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by rabanne on Friday June 26, 2020 @09:54AM (#23651989)
I know simple math, thank you. As I pointed out in the other reply, the rate of assult to US police, who are armed and more hostile to you is only about 25% lower than UK police where the majority of them don't carry a firearm. Actually we don't know the proseuction rate so we don't even know it's that lower.
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by evanpw on Friday June 26, 2020 @09:40AM (#23651827)
The US population is more than 4x bigger than the UK, and seems to also have more police per capita, so those numbers would imply that policing is safer in the US. (Which I don't quite believe; more likely those assault numbers are incomparable or just wrong).
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by rabanne on Friday June 26, 2020 @09:45AM (#23651886)
I wanted to point out that the rate of assult to US police, who are armed and more hostile to you is only about 25% lower than UK police where the majority of them don't carry a firearm.
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by PJDK on Friday June 26, 2020 @10:06AM (#23652101)
Has anyone done any deep analysis of this kind of thing.

Of those assaults, what impact did the police officer's gun have on the situation?

You can imagine an example where the gun is an asset - for example if the officer encounters an ongoing potentially deadly assault and then can shoot the perpetrator.

But I feel like more often the gun is a liability, an unarmed person is held at gunpoint and becomes violent - the police officer is left with the option of shooting the person or letting them get away. If they were using a batton/cs spray/taser (options available to regular British police) they then have many more options available to them.

Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by RHSeeger on Friday June 26, 2020 @12:51PM (#23654104)
The stats I'm looking at say there are ~65m people in the UK and ~330m in the US. So about 5x the number of people. If that's true (5x people) and the assault stats are true (3.6x assaults), then policing more dangerous in the UK.

(this feels off to me.. am I doing my math wrong?)

Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by mrec on Friday June 26, 2020 @09:38AM (#23651813)
Those figures don't look like they're adjusted for population. US pop is about 5x UK's.
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by blaser-waffle on Friday June 26, 2020 @10:00AM (#23652034)
> By analogy, people are allowed to own rocket launchers as well (it's true!) but that doesn't mean every beat cop should carry one.

They can own rocket launchers the same way they can own private jets. They're comparatively rare, expensive as hell, and utterly unrealistic for the average person. It's a bad analogy.

Meanwhile, regular long-arm firearms and handguns are insanely common in the US, comparatively cheap, and often very practical to carry or store in vehicles. The US has a crazy level of per capita gun ownership, like 120 guns for every 100 people. Gun ownership isn't rare, and disarmed police are going to get killed haggling after heavily armed civilians.

Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by noobermin on Friday June 26, 2020 @02:21PM (#23655201)
Another option essentially is to move certain functions away from police, such as traffic enforcement (use more cameras and non-armed officers who need not be police) certain kinds of house calls like for the mentally ill to be done by social workers, and such. The police can be reserved for violent, life-or-death situations.
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by michaelt on Friday June 26, 2020 @09:17AM (#23651603)
If you can easily get a $500 device that makes 95% of cops stop chasing you, wouldn't every rational violent criminal buy one?

I suppose it could work if 95% of the police were engaged in something other than apprehending violent criminals...

Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by freeone3000 on Friday June 26, 2020 @09:44AM (#23651884)
According to https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rpa11.pdf , approximately 8.2% were "reported crime emergency". So, in effect, 91.8% of all police contact with the public is something other than apprehending criminals at all.
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by Nursie on Friday June 26, 2020 @09:30AM (#23651717)
> I suppose it could work if 95% of the police were engaged in something other than apprehending violent criminals...

I would be surprised if apprehending violent criminals was more that 5% of the job, personally. Wouldn't you?

To the downvoters; it is your right to do so, but think about it - Police are on patrol, taking reports of crimes that happened previously, they guard things, they help keep order at sporting events, they're on hand for political events. They're being traffic cops, white collar cops, they appear in court, all sorts of activities. And there's paperwork.

I would be very surprised if at any one time more than 5% of cops, or for a cop on average, more than 5% of their time was directly "apprehending violent criminals". It's important they do so, of course.

Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by kevin_thibedeau on Friday June 26, 2020 @11:30AM (#23653102)
It's even lower than that in most of the US where cops are basically waiting around for something to happen most of the time. But the narrative is bullets flying every time they enter the war zone of placid suburbia.
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by greedo on Friday June 26, 2020 @01:36PM (#23654658)
Cop work is exceedingly boring. If you ever do a ride-along, you'll see how boring. And with a ride-along, they try to show you the exciting stuff since it's a recruitment method. Lots of driving around, lots of running tags, lots of looking for something meaningful to do when it's dark and not much is happening. Idle hands are the Devil's workshop etc etc.

https://medium.com/@OfcrACab/confessions-of-a-former-bastard...

Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by deepakhj on Friday June 26, 2020 @09:34AM (#23651757)
There’s absolutely no benefit to shooting an officer as a criminal. You instantly become added to America’s most wanted list and the courts will throw the book at you.
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by kube-system on Friday June 26, 2020 @09:42AM (#23651856)
That might not be a marginal deterrent if the criminal has already committed significant crimes.

[murder suspect] + [doesn't fight] = [life in prison], [no chance of escaping]

[murder suspect] + [does fight] = [life in prison], [non-zero chance of escaping]

This is actually a reason we might want to reduce sentences for some crimes. 'Tough on crime' laws make criminals more brazen.

Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by packetlost on Friday June 26, 2020 @10:34AM (#23652404)
Some crimes, sure. I don't think (intentional) murderers should be getting released back into the public very quickly though
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by vanattab on Friday June 26, 2020 @09:52AM (#23651968)
Criminals committing acts of violence often are not acting based on rational reasoning. Often it based on emotion/fear /anger.
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by michaelt on Friday June 26, 2020 @09:41AM (#23651844)
You don't need to draw and shoot a gun if merely having one visible makes the cops get out your way and await backup.
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by sukilot on Friday June 26, 2020 @10:29AM (#23652333)
Which is good. It means we can avoid violence, collect evidence for an easy conviction (such as videoing a firearms violation) and apprehend criminals safely using trained SWAT forces.
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by greedo on Friday June 26, 2020 @01:38PM (#23654676)
Nah, cops will just gun you down if they "think" you have any sort of firearm.

Watch this video. The cops don't see a gun, they think he has one because of the call, but they don't see one. The minute his hand goes towards his waste, they blast him...

https://www.abqjournal.com/1380152/apd-man-shot-by-officers-...

Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by rabanne on Friday June 26, 2020 @09:22AM (#23651647)
I'm seriously wondering whether this is a form of sarcasm or a bait. 10.8% of sworn officers faced assult in 2018[1], while armed. Cops threatened by people with or without firearm is not that rare. In 2018, 2,116 sworn officers were not only threatened but actually got shot(!) by a firearm.[1]

[1] https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2018

Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by sacred_numbers on Friday June 26, 2020 @09:56AM (#23652000)
2,116 officers were assaulted with a firearm, but only 6.1% of those 2,116 were injured in the assault. That's approximately 129 firearm injuries. That means the rate of non-fatal firearm injuries is approximately 16.1 per 100,000. In 2012 the rate of non-fatal firearm injuries from assault was approximately 15.67 per 100,000 for the general population. When adjusted for the sex demographics of the police (88% male) the rate is 24.93 per 100,000.

Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4700838/#!po=19...

Edit: It looks like the non-fatal firearm injury rate for officers is actually 23.6 per 100k. I had the wrong number in the denominator because not all police stations responded to the FBI survey.

Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by rabanne on Friday June 26, 2020 @10:00AM (#23652037)
You know you're comparing people fully armed and cautious people versus the general population, right? Also it's a biased comparison because the 2,116 could have been shot where the rate of "could have been shot" is much lower in the general public because obvious reasons.
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by rrss on Friday June 26, 2020 @10:35AM (#23652415)
You know that you failed to understand your own source and therefore claimed a number of officer shootings ~16x higher than reality, right? And 'sacred_numbers was kind enough to correct you?
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by nrclark on Friday June 26, 2020 @11:07AM (#23652803)
In most states, the legal definition of assault doesn't even require physical contact.

Trying to shove a police officer and miss? Assault. Stepping on their shoe while being arrested? Battery, and also probably assault. Spitting on a police officer? Battery, and probably aggravated assault.

It's very misleading to claim that 10% of police officers were assaulted in 2018. That might be true in a strict legal sense, but most of them probably walked away from their "assault" without so much as a bruise.

Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by x86_64Ubuntu on Friday June 26, 2020 @05:10PM (#23657080)
An assault? An assault is anything, and they slap charges such as Resisting Arrest on every one of their victims to help prosecutors stack charges.
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by austincheney on Friday June 26, 2020 @10:38AM (#23652445)
I suspect, and I don’t have any numbers, the occurrence rate of encountering a concealed rocket launcher when performing a traffic stop is quite low.
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by tengbretson on Friday June 26, 2020 @01:12PM (#23654354)
> By analogy, people are allowed to own rocket launchers as well (it's true!) but that doesn't mean every beat cop should carry one.

This would only seem relevant if your knowledge of weapons came from movies or video games where "bigger = better".

Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by ryan93 on Friday June 26, 2020 @09:44AM (#23651870)
So if a guy pulls a gun on the cops they are supposed to hide while he shoots until SWAT gets there? Its reasonable to have cops with no guns when encountering a gun is incredibly rare.
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by gridlockd on Friday June 26, 2020 @09:09AM (#23651553)
Of course it helps to have a gun if your opponent has a gun, because both of you now have a risk of getting shot.

If I know you don't have a gun because you're one of these unarmed cops, I can completely dominate the situation. I can make you stand on one leg and do a recital.

> By analogy, people are allowed to own rocket launchers as well (it's true!) but that doesn't mean every beat cop should carry one.

Rocket launchers are not anti-personnel weapons and no ordinary criminal carries them or would be expected to carry them. The best weapon to neutralize a threat wielding a rocket launcher is not another rocket launcher, it's a rifle.

Should we arrive at the situation where criminals routinely arrive in armored personnel carriers or tanks, then we can talk about arming the police with rocket launchers.

Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by sukilot on Friday June 26, 2020 @10:29AM (#23652344)
Right, so police need body armor, not handguns.
Re:Why the US military usually punishes misconduct but polic... by gridlockd on Saturday June 27, 2020 @04:15AM (#23660296)
Body armor might save your life, but it doesn't make you invincible to bullets. If you take a bullet with body armor, you're going down.

You're no threat whatsoever. You have no power in the situation, you can't get it under control, mitigate the threat, and so on.