You asked about ACAB and got an answer about ACAB. This feels like a cope.
Oh.
I see
If you think you can only come up with ax partial answer, it's usually an indication you don't understand the concept as well as you think and a good idea to just skip trying to come up with an answer.
Your talk if you want to! I'm just saying it might confuse the situation unless you have a complete answer.
I thought you did that deliberately so I was wondering why you were explaining what a slice was when I asked about making a pizza.
I'm not the same guy, it's just obvious to everyone else here what he was saying since we don't need our hands held through every implication.
If bad cops can just get rid of others who call out bad behavior, what is left but the corrupt and the complicit? Hence, complacency is bad too so ACAB.
First it was "tangent", then it was, "ax partial answer", so now what is your excuse?
Making assumptions and looking for excuses is the reason you Don't understand.
"If bad cops can just get rid of others who call out bad behavior, what is left but the corrupt and the complicit..."
If that were true, you would have a case.
Since that is not true, you don't.
Since that is not true, you don't.
Except in America it seems that's the exact case. Maybe not in other countries.
It seems like that's the case to you because you're surrounding yourself with an echo chamber instead of rationally thinking about the situation.
It makes no sense in any capacity to assume that any group of humans are all identical or behave identically.
We aren't saying they do. What we are saying is that the system discourages good cops to the point most are forced to leave. You would have realized this if you weren't blinded by your own axe to grind.
Yes, you are saying that:
"Except in America it seems that's the exact case"
Please elaborate on what axe I'm grinding.
Logically explaining the truth and repeating basic facts?
How devious.
Logically explaining the truth and repeating basic facts?
What facts? You keep making statements without baking them up at all, or even giving any reasoning.
I don't agree with leftists that all police throughout the world are evil or unnecessary. I think in some countries they are demonstrably better or worse than others. Places like Mexico and the USA they seem to be corrupt or straight up sadists, who are in the pockets of gangs and rich capitalists respectively.
So you've already forgotten the facts, but your argument as that those facts that you can't remember don't have any reasoning?
Unconvinciiing.
Some police officers are corrupt and sadists.
Some bakers are corrupt and sadists as well.
Don't worry. Although you appear confused and defensive about these statements, nobody is saying otherwise.
No I haven't forgotten anything you have said. You were claiming that good cops weren't being pushed out of the USA police, and that they aren't all bad as a result. Yet you haven't actually given a single example.
Don't worry. Although you appear confused and defensive about these statements, nobody is saying otherwise.
You are the one being defensive and confused here. We weren't arguing that only some are bad. I am arguing that the majority are bad in the USA and Mexico because any good police would be pushed to leave because of institutional failings.
I don't remember claiming that good cops weren't being pushed out of the USA police, do you have a source for that?
And then you agreeing with me that not acab.
Great, I agree.
Hardly a tangent. If a cop is otherwise good, his simple existence within the establishment of "cop" is enabling the continued existence of that establishment, while also providing obfuscation for the shitbags, letting people like you say not all cops are bastards. In the famous words of Tim minchin, "if you cover for another mother fucker who's a kiddy fucker the fuck you mother fucker you're no better than the rapist" - replace "kiddy fucker" with any of the atrocities police are regularly known for.
The establishment is corrupt, you cannot be party to it and be innocent, period.
That's such a limited and flawed perspective.
Literally any example of a whistleblower destroys your client.
The evolution of civil rights proves you wrong.
Of course you can make change from the inside, of course it's easier to pretend you can't. That's a scary job.
If you condemn everybody trying to make a positive change within a dangerous environment at personal risk, then you don't have to question why you aren't putting yourself at risk trying to make a change yourself.
The institution that is The Police is too large to change with any action other than collectively deciding it's not one we need. Other industries, I'll give you. That's why, for instance, not all, idk.. dentists? Are bastards.
Cops have one thing that other industries do not - the explicit right by the state to use violent force against its citizens with no, or next to no, legal repercussions. This closeness and uniqueness means that we can't really CHANGE them, the state is too invested in their continuation. The only thing to do is to seek to eliminate it.
As far as whistleblowers, they're whistleblowers, not cops. They put the badge down (most likely, you don't often get to continue serving after blowing the whistle), and they did something good. They were still a bastard before tho.
Some states are already switching out police for mental health professionals and civilian law enforcement.
That shows that you can change the system.
It's difficult, but with as giant an institution as law enforcement already having been changed fairly rapidly just in the last hundred years, it doesn't make any sense not to expect further change.
Especially when so many legal groups and victim advocacy groups are demanding change and changes are literally occurring currently.
And yea, saying all dentists are bad is about as absurd as saying all cops are bad.
As far as whistleblowers go, I was referring to all whistleblowers anywhere, but yes whistleblowers are cops and that's a good point.
You can pretend that a cop who reports or fights against corruption or supports the rights of minorities isn't a cop, but that's factually and objectively inaccurate.
Is a cop marching in BLM rallies a bastard? Is a cop getting a rape victim, proper health and mental support even if it isn't warranted by their department a bastard?
Of course not, you have to ridiculous myopic mental gymnastics to come to the conclusion that acab when it's clearly not true.
The institution is being changed, by us. By people forcing changes. The police didn't just decide to include mental health professionals randomly, we put pressure on them and our elected officials.
I can get behind someone saying that some form of policing may be necessary. This is where I cut out caveats for things such as the idealized version of a sheriff. Someone elected by the community they're policing, who is a member of the community they're policing, and with rather limited power in excess of the average citizen.
As far as the BLM protests go, honestly yeah - if they're marching in uniform they're bastards. Most likely their MO is to show some of these people that "not all cops!". If they want to support the cause, they can, not as cops though. That's tone deaf at best.
Is a cop getting a rape victim help a bastard? Yup. They're doing a good thing, as a bastard. The two aren't mutually exclusive. Maybe they should change their career into something a bit more geared towards helping people, like social worker or similar.
You're taking personal credit for the changes I was talking about after agreeing with me.
Strange opening.
Okay so you define good and people as bastards, so for you, APAB. All people are bastards.
You think everybody is a bastard. That's your own problem, and further clear evidence that people who use the phrase acab don't understand the world around them
Because if you look at the legal experts, the cops, the civil Rights groups making those changes? They aren't screaming illogical, false slogans across the table at police unions without understanding what they're saying.
They know that doesn't effect change.
They're negotiating changes within a flawed system.
And they're changing the system from within and without successfully whether or not you hurl inaccurate epithets into the void of the internet or scrunch your eyes up tight so you can't see what's going on around you.
Nope. I think cops are bastards. They did a thing that makes them a bastard. They stop being a bastard when they stop being a cop. They can be bastards for other reasons, but if they don't do those things they also aren't bastards.
I... Didn't take personal credit for anything, any more than I do for public schools or our road system. I'm part of the society that helped create those things, enact that change. I didn't personally do them, but I did have a hand (more like voice) in their creation.
I deny, however, any credit to the institution that is police. They did not change by choice. They routinely refuse to change by choice, it is only by our (society's, again - not me personally) hand that they ever change.
I see, so you don't consider yourself part of society.
"They can be bastards for other reasons, but if they don't do those things they also aren't bastards."
Not much of an argument, that what you do and are doesn't determine what you do or are.
"I deny, however, any credit to the institution that is police."
Good thing no one gave credit to that institution then!
"They did not change by choice."
According to you, it doesn't matter if they change by choice or not. All humans are immutably defined in perpetuity.
"They routinely refuse to change by choice"
Again, apparently choice doesn't matter in your eyes.
This whole previous comment. It's just you either agreeing with me or contradicting yourself.
But high five! I'll take it.
Not doing this anymore. You clearly only intend to twist the words I'm saying, rather than apply a bit of logic and argumentative integrity. Have a good life.
I'm using your literal quotes and then directly and succinctly pointing out their errors.
It must be difficult for you that direct analytical critique of your perspective related to the topic we are discussing confounds you so.
Sure. Taaangent?
You asked about ACAB and got an answer about ACAB. This feels like a cope.
Oh.
I see
If you think you can only come up with ax partial answer, it's usually an indication you don't understand the concept as well as you think and a good idea to just skip trying to come up with an answer.
Your talk if you want to! I'm just saying it might confuse the situation unless you have a complete answer.
I thought you did that deliberately so I was wondering why you were explaining what a slice was when I asked about making a pizza.
I'm not the same guy, it's just obvious to everyone else here what he was saying since we don't need our hands held through every implication.
If bad cops can just get rid of others who call out bad behavior, what is left but the corrupt and the complicit? Hence, complacency is bad too so ACAB.
First it was "tangent", then it was, "ax partial answer", so now what is your excuse?
Making assumptions and looking for excuses is the reason you Don't understand.
"If bad cops can just get rid of others who call out bad behavior, what is left but the corrupt and the complicit..."
If that were true, you would have a case.
Since that is not true, you don't.
Except in America it seems that's the exact case. Maybe not in other countries.
It seems like that's the case to you because you're surrounding yourself with an echo chamber instead of rationally thinking about the situation.
It makes no sense in any capacity to assume that any group of humans are all identical or behave identically.
We aren't saying they do. What we are saying is that the system discourages good cops to the point most are forced to leave. You would have realized this if you weren't blinded by your own axe to grind.
Yes, you are saying that:
"Except in America it seems that's the exact case"
Please elaborate on what axe I'm grinding.
Logically explaining the truth and repeating basic facts?
How devious.
What facts? You keep making statements without baking them up at all, or even giving any reasoning.
I don't agree with leftists that all police throughout the world are evil or unnecessary. I think in some countries they are demonstrably better or worse than others. Places like Mexico and the USA they seem to be corrupt or straight up sadists, who are in the pockets of gangs and rich capitalists respectively.
So you've already forgotten the facts, but your argument as that those facts that you can't remember don't have any reasoning?
Unconvinciiing.
Some police officers are corrupt and sadists.
Some bakers are corrupt and sadists as well.
Don't worry. Although you appear confused and defensive about these statements, nobody is saying otherwise.
No I haven't forgotten anything you have said. You were claiming that good cops weren't being pushed out of the USA police, and that they aren't all bad as a result. Yet you haven't actually given a single example.
You are the one being defensive and confused here. We weren't arguing that only some are bad. I am arguing that the majority are bad in the USA and Mexico because any good police would be pushed to leave because of institutional failings.
I don't remember claiming that good cops weren't being pushed out of the USA police, do you have a source for that?
And then you agreeing with me that not acab.
Great, I agree.
Hardly a tangent. If a cop is otherwise good, his simple existence within the establishment of "cop" is enabling the continued existence of that establishment, while also providing obfuscation for the shitbags, letting people like you say not all cops are bastards. In the famous words of Tim minchin, "if you cover for another mother fucker who's a kiddy fucker the fuck you mother fucker you're no better than the rapist" - replace "kiddy fucker" with any of the atrocities police are regularly known for.
The establishment is corrupt, you cannot be party to it and be innocent, period.
That's such a limited and flawed perspective.
Literally any example of a whistleblower destroys your client.
The evolution of civil rights proves you wrong.
Of course you can make change from the inside, of course it's easier to pretend you can't. That's a scary job.
If you condemn everybody trying to make a positive change within a dangerous environment at personal risk, then you don't have to question why you aren't putting yourself at risk trying to make a change yourself.
The institution that is The Police is too large to change with any action other than collectively deciding it's not one we need. Other industries, I'll give you. That's why, for instance, not all, idk.. dentists? Are bastards.
Cops have one thing that other industries do not - the explicit right by the state to use violent force against its citizens with no, or next to no, legal repercussions. This closeness and uniqueness means that we can't really CHANGE them, the state is too invested in their continuation. The only thing to do is to seek to eliminate it.
As far as whistleblowers, they're whistleblowers, not cops. They put the badge down (most likely, you don't often get to continue serving after blowing the whistle), and they did something good. They were still a bastard before tho.
Some states are already switching out police for mental health professionals and civilian law enforcement.
That shows that you can change the system.
It's difficult, but with as giant an institution as law enforcement already having been changed fairly rapidly just in the last hundred years, it doesn't make any sense not to expect further change.
Especially when so many legal groups and victim advocacy groups are demanding change and changes are literally occurring currently.
And yea, saying all dentists are bad is about as absurd as saying all cops are bad.
As far as whistleblowers go, I was referring to all whistleblowers anywhere, but yes whistleblowers are cops and that's a good point.
You can pretend that a cop who reports or fights against corruption or supports the rights of minorities isn't a cop, but that's factually and objectively inaccurate.
Is a cop marching in BLM rallies a bastard? Is a cop getting a rape victim, proper health and mental support even if it isn't warranted by their department a bastard?
Of course not, you have to ridiculous myopic mental gymnastics to come to the conclusion that acab when it's clearly not true.
The institution is being changed, by us. By people forcing changes. The police didn't just decide to include mental health professionals randomly, we put pressure on them and our elected officials.
I can get behind someone saying that some form of policing may be necessary. This is where I cut out caveats for things such as the idealized version of a sheriff. Someone elected by the community they're policing, who is a member of the community they're policing, and with rather limited power in excess of the average citizen.
As far as the BLM protests go, honestly yeah - if they're marching in uniform they're bastards. Most likely their MO is to show some of these people that "not all cops!". If they want to support the cause, they can, not as cops though. That's tone deaf at best.
Is a cop getting a rape victim help a bastard? Yup. They're doing a good thing, as a bastard. The two aren't mutually exclusive. Maybe they should change their career into something a bit more geared towards helping people, like social worker or similar.
You're taking personal credit for the changes I was talking about after agreeing with me.
Strange opening.
Okay so you define good and people as bastards, so for you, APAB. All people are bastards.
You think everybody is a bastard. That's your own problem, and further clear evidence that people who use the phrase acab don't understand the world around them
Because if you look at the legal experts, the cops, the civil Rights groups making those changes? They aren't screaming illogical, false slogans across the table at police unions without understanding what they're saying.
They know that doesn't effect change.
They're negotiating changes within a flawed system.
And they're changing the system from within and without successfully whether or not you hurl inaccurate epithets into the void of the internet or scrunch your eyes up tight so you can't see what's going on around you.
Nope. I think cops are bastards. They did a thing that makes them a bastard. They stop being a bastard when they stop being a cop. They can be bastards for other reasons, but if they don't do those things they also aren't bastards.
I... Didn't take personal credit for anything, any more than I do for public schools or our road system. I'm part of the society that helped create those things, enact that change. I didn't personally do them, but I did have a hand (more like voice) in their creation.
I deny, however, any credit to the institution that is police. They did not change by choice. They routinely refuse to change by choice, it is only by our (society's, again - not me personally) hand that they ever change.
I see, so you don't consider yourself part of society.
"They can be bastards for other reasons, but if they don't do those things they also aren't bastards."
Not much of an argument, that what you do and are doesn't determine what you do or are.
"I deny, however, any credit to the institution that is police."
Good thing no one gave credit to that institution then!
"They did not change by choice."
According to you, it doesn't matter if they change by choice or not. All humans are immutably defined in perpetuity.
"They routinely refuse to change by choice"
Again, apparently choice doesn't matter in your eyes.
This whole previous comment. It's just you either agreeing with me or contradicting yourself.
But high five! I'll take it.
Not doing this anymore. You clearly only intend to twist the words I'm saying, rather than apply a bit of logic and argumentative integrity. Have a good life.
I'm using your literal quotes and then directly and succinctly pointing out their errors.
It must be difficult for you that direct analytical critique of your perspective related to the topic we are discussing confounds you so.