> most people don't consider the police an armed gang

Actually a significant portion of the population DO consider the police an armed gang, and have done so for quite some time. For starters, poor people in urban areas. The difference is that now wealthier people are starting to be treated the same way poor people have been treated all along.

Very true.

Growing up I was far more scared of the police than anyone else in what was not a very nice area.

This wasn't cultural conditioning either.

It was the experience of being routinely stopped, questioned, accused, intimidated and occasionally humiliated by being made to partially disrobe. It makes for a terrible feeling of powerlessness when someone else can do whatever they want to you at any time and any effort to avoid much less rebuke the situation will only make it worse.

At least one friend of mine from that time is now a police officer. His experience has only confirmed the prevalence of this ugly "at war" mentality in in law enforcement.

That is exactly what I came here to say. Plenty of people, like me, don't trust the police. In America, probably other countries too, a problem is only recognized as a problem when it affects the wealthy or privileged.

"most people don't consider the police an armed gang"

The police are the very definition of an armed gang. Just a legally sanctioned one.

They have a monopoly on violence - what else would you call it?

I really don't like this sort of intentionally-dense argument by definition. Certainly the police could be called a "gang" under some definitions of the word, but we all know that the implication of "armed gang" in this context is very different. Words have nuance.

I'm not against the police necessarily. They have their role in society. But it is what it is - state sanctioned coercion that when balanced correctly, keeps society humming along.

Unfortunately, after the drug war stuff started ratcheting up + 911, the proper balance has shifted.

God forbids you ever get raided in the middle of the night by a swat team because of an administrative error, or minor offense.

With a knee on your back, your face pressed against the ground, barely able to breath and watching your wife going through the same thing. You then might re-evaluate the hyperbole, but you most likely won't because of the feral panic state you would be in.

Mr Buttle?

Heating engineer

> most people don't consider the police an armed gang

Because the militarization of police, and the increasing use of SWAT, are trends that argue against this.

What if next time instead of sending regular officers they send in SWAT?

> i.e. most people don't consider the police an armed gang

Give it another few years of militarizing the police force. Government-funded vigilantes with an uniform and a pack of laws to protect them from the consequences of their own abuse is a recipe for succes, tried and tested from China to South America.

They should update their perception of the police to fit reality.