I’m from the city this cop was from and if I remember correctly he was shot in the head and survived but obviously not the same. Maybe he died I don’t really remember.
I’m not a fan of the police but on a human level some awful stuff happened to this guy.
Edit: looked it up because I was curious he underwent brain surgery and survived.
Fuck the police as a whole tho
I used to have that same belief but watching “good” cops cover for bad ones made me realize they’re all scummy.
I agree even this guy but life has nuance and I felt this was info that is pertinent to the meme.
There is always some nuance, but in general most morally upstanding people drop out of training or are pushed out of the force in some way.
That’s the rub, ask yourself why doesn’t it happen more often that a “good cop” calls out a “bad cop?” It just seem so rare. I don’t understand why, these are people from the same community. 🤷♂️
Good cops are usually punished for calling out bad cops. The system is broken.
Well someone somewhere still believes that prison is about rehabilation and not punishment
also drug addiction is arguably something that the word treatment would be more applicable for
A society with no concept of redeemeption will never get far
I’m all for caging money making dealers that kill when they are threatened with prison. I’ve seen too many people get killed because some cunt that already has enough money is scared to get caught.
If only those were the people that US cops actually arrested.
I know. It’s so sad. Know gang members I figure out they call the cops on their enemies alto get their enemies pissed at the police until the shoot out and usually their victim dies and the cops like gets fucked up.
They use the cops to get away with murder… just like rich people and companies do.
Trap jaw affiliates and the AX graffiti crew do it in New Hampshire/Boston/RI/CT/NYC/Epping/Manchester
They got two people I know killed and even the cops don’t want to hear it.
That’s why I have this username.
I’m starting to think a lot of the 2020 black deaths were staged to help Trump, who is probably controlled/in the mob. (Roger stone/oath keepers/bloods)
Giuliani “got rid of crime” in NYC… i think he was either a part of masking the organized crime or he got owned for fighting it and now they control him.
What’s the threshold of income that would meet your criteria? Do you normally base jail time off of someone’s income, legally or illegally?
Enough to rent and live in a studio apartment. (If they are single)
Im mainly talking about anyone willing to murder innocent people to scare off people that figured out their drug/burglary/pimp game.
I think drugs and prostitution should be legalized.
I’ve known too many criminals that are complete tyrants and fascists. They are heartless and will take from anyone. They are just as worthless as materialistic rich people.
It’s the same logic as when Republicans claim Government doesn’t work…
It’s not ignorance or stupidity, it’s a mission statement… Republicans are trying to make Government not work and Cops are actively trying to fuck you over
Government is bad and we should have less of it in our faces. To achieve this goal, let’s make the consumption of certain popular drugs illegal, and while we’re at it make laws restricting what women, trans, gay, etc people can do. This should reduce the government’s involvement in our day-to-day lives.
I just don’t understand it. Less government = good (according to practically every republican I’ve met), so lets vote for more laws which restrict people and give the government more power.
The logic is deterrence.
I mean it’s stupid, but that’s what the supporters think.
The thing they are missing is that no one commits a crime thinking they will get caught. So ever increasing the deterrence doesn’t help.
Drugs is a public health issue, no really criminal. Prohibition doesn’t work with things done at scales like drugs and alcohol. You’re just feeding the criminal gangs.
It’s not deterrence, that’s not the point. Deterrence does not work.
It’s about sending people to prison so they can do cheap labor. It’s also about racism because it’s disproportionately targeted towards minorities. It absolutely makes sense in that light.
I’m sure that is the motivation of some, those involved, but the vast majority of support will be voters who think deterrence works.
It’s the prison-industrial complex paying the politicians to push this stuff through. Voters don’t matter to the politics being pushed, they just get told later that they wanted them.
Policy at a macro scale is very different than policy at a citizen level. While both inform the other many decisions are made on either side without understanding consequences. Banning drug use at a home or even a town level could make sense and work in the head of household’s favor but that one town or house banning the use could make things worse for another, but from the smaller level makes a ton of sense, unfortunately.
Maybe. But not all police forces and legal systems are like this. In the developed world, the US is a bit of an outlier.
The logic is subjugation. These laws are applied largely to a specific group of people, and even if they don’t spend life in prison, their ability to build a life for themselves afterwards is neutered, and they lost the right to vote.
The logic is it also ruins other peoples lives. No one exists in society in a nut shell or as an island. If your choice to use drugs would expose, entice, or otherwise encourage a person to use drugs then it is reasonable in my opinion for the state to protect people from it.
That being said clearly our approach isn’t working. There shouldn’t be laissez-faire drug use all over but there shouldn’t be life in prison immediately consequences either.
The most succesful drug rehabilitation programs are mandatory rehab facilities that are a choice alternate to going to jail for an equal amount of time.
Also housing first models are incredibly effective. But… the entire western world uses housing as an investment vehicle and commodity so it is diametrically opposed to housing first initiatives. If the average citizen is paying 50% of their income for housing and then “junkies” get given free housing the political party that implemented it would be booted so fast.
It’s supposed to be rehabilitation, but also it’s to stop you from ruining other people’s lives
What other people have their lives ruined when I take a drug?
The family you ran over while you were drunk
Logic is prison slave labor=$$$
I am once again asking everyone to read Alex Vitale’s End of Policing
Conspiracy to enslave the poor.
Hey what are you some kind of Russian bo-
…
Checks Constitution
(Yes this is cringe but I want it that way)
But the rich also take drugs.
Except they don’t get caught.
Everyone breaks the law, and it is selectively enforced against the poor. System working as intended. System working as intended.
when the rich get caught for drug use they go to rehab
Failure to enforce drug prohibition resulted in Qing China having a nationwide addiction epidemic for British opium, resulting in the opium wars, the country’s bankruptcy, partial European colonization as well as the so-called “century of humiliation”. The effects of this addiction epidemic are still being felt nowadays, e.g. in widespread racism towards Asian people as well as the current opioid epidemic where Chinese-made fentanyl is exported worldwide with the unofficial sanction of the Chinese government.
This is the reason why drug prohibition is a thing, and why many Asian countries have death sentences even for simple possession of narcotics.
Yeah, it’s not about empathy for you at all
You’re a cog in the machine and they’re protecting the machine, not you.
There is no way you just compared modern drugs and war on drugs on the fucking Qing China.
Especially when there are MODERN examples of drug decriminalisation that work, like Portugal or Switzerland.
You are either completely ignorant or stupid to ignore it and use a fucking ancient example instead
Why not? The opium wars are a dark spot in Chinese history and the fascist CCP government is hell bent on “revenge” against the west for that. That’s why the CCP is exporting fentanyl to the west via shell companies and causing the modern opioid epidemic. I would like to see how decriminalization can deal with a targeted attack like that.
This approach is 100 years after prohibition. Hopefully it can overcome the institutional momentum of current drug laws and get implemented in more places.
This is such a bastardization of history. Shame on you for spreading this nonsense.
Yeah… Racism has nothing to do with the historical opium epidemic in China. Racists just racist. Anyone different from them too, like LGBTQ, and intellectuals.
There are racists everywhere that’s true, but people who are naturally racist are rare because racism is something that is taught. The lack of a strong voice for minority races is what allows racists in power to normalize their discrimination against them, eventually making it a systemic and widespread phenomenon.
You argue that the opium epidemic has absolutely zero effect on racism towards Chinese people. However I say that the opium epidemic directly started a chain of events that led to the downfall of the Chinese government, which enabled racist people to teach their racism to the government and the rest of society without fear of repercussions, therefore enabling widespread and systemic racism against Asians.
I’m sorry, I’ve never seen any mention linking racism to be caused by the Chinese opium epidemic. Because it’s not true. Racism is the belief that one’s own race is superior to others. In order for the opium epidemic to have caused it initially, the common person would have had to know about it at some point.
Due to the speed at which information traveled, hardly anyone was aware, let alone understood, that there was an entire country being controlled by opium sales from Britain.
What I’m trying to point out is that a racist individual will be racist no matter the cause, they were predisposed to think their race superior.
Faulty premises lead to faulty conclusions.
You know, that sounds like a convenient bullshit story by statists and other mobster to justify their never ending violence. Also, Britain weaponizing drugs, big cringe. You guys deserve thermonuclear armageddon so bad.
The fact that people who can produce brain farts like you are allowed to vote, should tell everyone why pure democracy cant work.
It didn’t say what mechanism would be used for the drugs to ruin your life. Prison works just as well as turning tricks for smack as far as life ruining goes.
It’s perfectly circular, like this man’s dome.
Don’t forget that drug laws are often racist e.g. cocaine possession carries a lesser punishment than crack, cannabis is a schedule 1 substance, etc. This goes some way to explaining the legal rationale.
How is this racist? I don’t doubt that you’re right but I’m not understanding what makes that racist. Are black people significantly more likely to have crack than cocaine or something? At first glance it seems logical to me that cocaine has less of a punishment than crack, but that’s based off of a somewhat limited understanding of the effects of the two drugs.
Crack and cocaine are the same drug! From https://americanaddictioncenters.org/cocaine-treatment/differences-with-crack: “Pharmacologically, cocaine and crack are the same substance.”
They are the same pharmacologically, but the effects between snorting and smoking vary greatly.
Regular cocaine powder is cocaine hydrochloride. Crack is made by mixing cocaine hydrochloride with ammonia and then burning off the hydrochloride which makes it a freebase. People don’t smoke regular cocaine until it has been turned into freebase. Smoking cocaine powder is just wasteful compared to snorting it.
Smoking crack results in a more rapid absorption into the bloodstream—compared to snorting the powder. Therefore, the effects are more rapid and quicker to dissipate than if someone just snorted cocaine.
Crack is cheaper than powder cocaine, because crack has less cocaine per dose, and is still very potent. So poorer areas get flooded with crack, as no one can afford to be addicted to cocaine powder in the lower class.
So, in conclusion, it is absolutely discriminatory to have harsher punishment for crack than cocaine. Even if crack is more potent, it has less illegal substance in it by weight than cocaine powder does.
It is right in the name.
The racist associations between crack and black people are rumored to actually be an intentional thing. The US government says the allegations have no merit, but the CIA has been accused of funneling large amounts of crack cocaine into the black neighborhoods of LA. Here’s one article about it on a .gov but you can find many other sources on google: THE CIA-CONTRA-CRACK COCAINE CONTROVERSY Relevant quote from the original source accusing them:
For the better part of a decade, a San Francisco Bay Area drug ring sold tons of cocaine to the Crips and Bloods street gangs of Los Angeles and funneled millions in drug profits to a Latin American guerrilla army run by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, a Mercury News investigation has found.
This drug network opened the first pipeline between Colombia’s cocaine cartels and the black neighborhoods of Los Angeles, a city now known as the “crack” capital of the world. The cocaine that flooded in helped spark a crack explosion in urban America . . . and provided the cash and connections needed for L.A.'s gangs to buy automatic weapons.
Air America is a decent movie about another CIA drug ring.
The rest can be found on the Nixon tapes. :)
You don’t go to jail (if there isn’t evidence of you selling it) in my country. Because it’s not a penal crime, but an administrative one.
Regan’s administration started the war on drugs. Convicting drugs users of a criminal crime has the effect of taking the right to vote away from people who tended not to vote for the Republican party and allowed them to be legally used as slave labour. At least one member of that administration has explicitly stated that this was a strategic decision to win elections.
*Reagan. Donald Regan was Ronald Reagan’s chief of staff for a couple of years.
I think it was John Erlichman who served under Nixon who said that. Whether that’s true is actually disputed though: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_drugs#20th_century
I agree that both Nixon’s and Reagan’s policies on drugs were pretty harmful though.
It’s called making an example out of someone.
Edit: Lots of people not understanding how that’s exactly what cops and shitheads in power think about sending people on drugs to jail. That’s scary.
They are more than happy to send your ass to jail for decades because of minor charges that don’t hurt anyone but yourself. You’re just a number to these assholes. They will make an example out of you if they can.
How many examples do you think are needed before people stop doing drugs?
7
Me? I don’t think anyone should go to jail for doing drugs.
So then I guess I’m not seeing how it serves as an example…
Idk man. I was just saying how they think of it.
I think people thought you were defending their stance
That’s the only thing I can think of lol
Yup that’s exactly how it came off (to me).
Then maybe stop making examples.
Hopefully they will. But we all know how much they love the war on drugs.
deleted by creator
By sending them to
crime school… I mean jail/prison.How’s that working out?
Great. For drug traffickers, prison system and politicians.
Oh you mean drug addicts … fuck them you don’t actually care about those right? /s
And the companies they work for almost for nothing.
Just to be clear, are you asking me as if I’m a cop that thinks like that?
