this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2023
472 points (94.9% liked)

THE POLICE PROBLEM

2552 readers
291 users here now

    The police problem is that police are policed by the police. Cops are accountable only to other cops, which is no accountability at all.

    99.9999% of police brutality, corruption, and misconduct is never investigated, never punished, never makes the news, so it's not on this page.

    When cops are caught breaking the law, they're investigated by other cops. Details are kept quiet, the officers' names are withheld from public knowledge, and what info is eventually released is only what police choose to release — often nothing at all.

    When police are fired — which is all too rare — they leave with 'law enforcement experience' and can easily find work in another police department nearby. It's called "Wandering Cops."

    When police testify under oath, they lie so frequently that cops themselves have a joking term for it: "testilying." Yet it's almost unheard of for police to be punished or prosecuted for perjury.

    Cops can and do get away with lawlessness, because cops protect other cops. If they don't, they aren't cops for long.

    The legal doctrine of "qualified immunity" renders police officers invulnerable to lawsuits for almost anything they do. In practice, getting past 'qualified immunity' is so unlikely, it makes headlines when it happens.

    All this is a path to a police state.

    In a free society, police must always be under serious and skeptical public oversight, with non-cops and non-cronies in charge, issuing genuine punishment when warranted.

    Police who break the law must be prosecuted like anyone else, promptly fired if guilty, and barred from ever working in law-enforcement again.

    That's the solution.

♦ ♦ ♦

Our definition of ‘cops’ is broad, and includes prison guards, probation officers, shitty DAs and judges, etc — anyone who has the authority to fuck over people’s lives, with minimal or no oversight.

♦ ♦ ♦

RULES

Real-life decorum is expected. Please don't say things only a child or a jackass would say in person.

If you're here to support the police, you're trolling. Please exercise your right to remain silent.

Saying ~~cops~~ ANYONE should be killed lowers the IQ in any conversation. They're about killing people; we're not.

Please don't dox or post calls for harassment, vigilantism, tar & feather attacks, etc.

Please also abide by the instance rules.

It you've been banned but don't know why, check the moderator's log. If you feel you didn't deserve it, hey, I'm new at this and maybe you're right. Send a cordial PM, for a second chance.

♦ ♦ ♦

ALLIES

!abolition@slrpnk.net

!acab@lemmygrad.ml

r/ACAB

r/BadCopNoDonut/

Randy Balko

The Civil Rights Lawyer

The Honest Courtesan

Identity Project

MirandaWarning.org

♦ ♦ ♦

INFO

A demonstrator's guide to understanding riot munitions

Adultification

Cops aren't supposed to be smart

Don't talk to the police.

Killings by law enforcement in Canada

Killings by law enforcement in the United Kingdom

Killings by law enforcement in the United States

Know your rights: Filming the police

Three words. 70 cases. The tragic history of 'I can’t breathe' (as of 2020)

Police aren't primarily about helping you or solving crimes.

Police lie under oath, a lot

Police spin: An object lesson in Copspeak

Police unions and arbitrators keep abusive cops on the street

Shielded from Justice: Police Brutality and Accountability in the United States

So you wanna be a cop?

When the police knock on your door

♦ ♦ ♦

ORGANIZATIONS

Black Lives Matter

Campaign Zero

Innocence Project

The Marshall Project

Movement Law Lab

NAACP

National Police Accountability Project

Say Their Names

Vera: Ending Mass Incarceration

 

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Archived page

    “Even after a judge required ACS to reunite Ms. Rivers with her baby, ACS continued to subject Ms. Rivers to needless court proceedings and a litany of conditions that interfered with her parenting of TW for months, while the unlawful removal of her baby was ratified by senior ACS leadership,” the complaint reads. “This was not because ACS was trying to protect TW; this was because Ms. Rivers is Black.”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Yendor@sh.itjust.works 65 points 1 year ago (5 children)

People who work in Child Protection aren’t doing it because they’re power hungry sociopaths. They’re people who do an absolutely horrible job for shit pay because they feel compelled to protect children.

I’m not in NY, but I have a friend who works in Child Protection. The shit her and her friends see is fucked up.

In the case here, the baby was born with measurable levels of THC in their system. It’s not illegal to smoke weed while pregnant, just like it’s not illegal to drink alcohol while pregnant - but both can fuck up a child for life before they’re even born.

[–] DougHolland@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago (4 children)

If it's not illegal to drink alcohol and smoke marijuana, I'd like to understand why she and the baby were tested for pot in the first place.

[–] AngryHumanoid@reddthat.com 10 points 1 year ago (46 children)

Because legal or not smoking pot WHILE PREGNANT is bad. Alcohol is legal, would you have a problem with them testing the mother or babies BAC?

load more comments (46 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The recommended maximum amount of alcohol while pregnant isn't zero. 12g a day is what I'm seeing in a quick search. I'm sure Marijuana can be safe for the child below a certain level. This article doesn't state any levels besides above zero, and it also doesn't stare any defects caused by it. It does seem to imply no complications though.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

The people who work in child protection don't necessarily need to be power hungry in order to be racist. There are tons of people in shit jobs getting shit pay who are as racist as it gets. In fact I would argue that most people who are racist are working shit jobs for shit pay. And just because the person you know in that job position is a good human being doesn't absolve others of being racist pieces of shit who look down on black women and use whatever excuse they can use to take their kids from them.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Astroturfed@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (9 children)

Child was born with measurable levels of THC in its system. So all of you outraged folks are ok with women who smoke cigarettes, drink and cheef up while pregnant right? Smoking weed when you have a kid, whatever fine. Even if it's illegal. This kid is damaged because the mother couldn't quit smoking weed when pregnant. That's not something you should be defending.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 16 points 1 year ago (5 children)

There is a recommended maximum amount of alcohol to be consumed whole pregnant. It isn't zero. I'm sure the same should be true for almost any other substance, but as far as I'm aware the guidelines for Marijuana don't exist, though they may. I don't really know. The article does not state how much she used or if it was above or below any recommendations, or that the child had any birth defects related to Marijuana use. In fact, it seems to imply that there wasn't any complications besides legal ones.

[–] smollittlefrog 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

Research on using marijuana during pregnancy is limited, but to noone's surprise, it's assumed to be harmful and recommended against.

Using drugs during pregnancy is not okay. Nice to hear this child apparently was lucky.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] CluelessLemmyng@lemmy.sdf.org 26 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"The woman, Chanetto Rivers, will receive more than $75,000 and payment for legal fees after she accused New York City and its child welfare agency of separating her from her son when he and Rivers tested positive for marijuana in August 2021."

Newborn tested positive for marijuana. Looks like the agency originally believed there to be an abuse issue. Makes sense. Alcohol is legal, but if a child is being exposed to alcoholic abuse, best to take them away from the environment.

And it appears the settlement was more about the difficulties in getting her child back due to systemic racism in the courts.

[–] DougHolland@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

In her lawsuit, Rivers claimed that hospital staff tested her for drugs without her consent in August 2021, when she was “overwhelmed with happiness and drained by the birth” of her son, TW.

Rivers and her newborn tested positive for marijuana, and the agency told hospital staff to hold the child “indefinitely,” according to the federal lawsuit.

I see nothing in the article indicating any problem except racism.

[–] CluelessLemmyng@lemmy.sdf.org 22 points 1 year ago (4 children)

And the article is omitting information such as why there was a drug test to begin with and if it was breach in privacy, why is the hospital not being sued?

Here's why: "claims from a hospital worker that she smoked marijuana in the hospital room". Mother also had previous interactions with the agency in regards to her older children.

So, hospital has cause to run a drug tests, drug test comes back positive on mother and newborn. Hospital reports to ACS who tell hospital to hold baby. Mother goes to court to get baby released, but this whole issue greatly affects an existing case she has with ACS in getting her older children back.

The lawsuit claims racism and falls flat when evidence suggests she is a neglectful parent and willingly endangering the unborn child by smoking marijuana while pregnant.

This is not a hill to die on when it comes to police problems. Not when there are more clear cut examples of systemic issues than this.

[–] DougHolland@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I'm old and fat, and would die climbing any hill.

Always I've been told that there's confidentiality when dealing with doctors, hospitals, clinics, even blood and urine samples, so when you say, "hospital has cause to run a drug test," that startles me. A hospital giving drug test results to ACS startles me. If this is OK, it establishes that doctors, hospitals, clinics, and medical labs are agents of law enforcement, which startles me.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Edgelord_Of_Tomorrow@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Am I reading it wrong or does it imply she smoked it while pregnant?

Even heavy weed smokers would agree you don't take that shit while pregnant. Most people try to avoid shit like Tylenol, let alone weed.

[–] DougHolland@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's advice, possibly even good advice. It's not the law.

Ignoring advice, even good advice, should not be grounds to lose a child.

[–] Edgelord_Of_Tomorrow@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I don't know the law in NY, but where I am something does not have to be against the law in order to trigger child safety services.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] jonne@infosec.pub 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Who the fuck is even testing babies for drugs?

[–] DougHolland@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

An un-named New York hospital, apparently, and then they turn the results over to ACS. I'd like to know which hospital did this, in case I ever need medical care in NYC.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] JizzmasterD@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So, not necessarily a police problem as much as a systemically racist ACS problem?

[–] DougHolland@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Different flavors of the same poison. Cops, prison guards, probation officers, agencies like this, shitty judges, etc — they all have the authority to fuck over people's lives with minimal or no oversight.

[–] flipht@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

There's a great book that highlights the systemic nature of these enforcement systems called The Poverty Industry.

load more comments
view more: next ›