I don't think the poster meant to literally call after he was murdered. But rather before it happens.
There was a recent story about a lady who called the police when someone kicked in her door. She hid on the roof while the criminal looked for her. The police came and got the criminal and took her off the roof. Should she have not called the police when the guy kicked in her door?
That's a robbery or home invasion, which was not the particular case I picked out. Note that I didn't complain about calling them to stop a murder, either.
The specific case I pointed out was mugging, which is when someone stops you on the street and steals from you, typically meant to include an implied threat of violence, eg, "Give me your purse or I'll fucking shoot you"
I found it interesting that out of three cases, I thought that calling the police was only the correct response to two of them, precisely because unless the police are already on their way when you get mugged, the mugging will be over before there's a chance for you to even call them.
My comment was meant specifically to point out that even when trying to list reasonable times to call the police, the person only seemed to get 2/3 being times the police would actually help the situation in any sense.
>My comment was meant specifically to point out that even when trying to list reasonable times to call the police, the person only seemed to get 2/3 being times the police would actually help the situation in any sense.
Did the thought ever cross your mind that the police may be able to get security footage from a nearby storefront to identify the assailant or that they might be able to give you a ride home after you lost all of your money, identification, and phone? Or did you just assume police are mobile morons who serve no purpose other than to shoot and beat people?
> Did the thought ever cross your mind that the police may be able to get security footage from a nearby storefront to identify the assailant
I'm aware that police do this when investigating crimes. However, this is also a source of misidentifying people, which often ends poorly. Young, black, and in a yellow shirt? Must be the first black guy we see in a yellow shirt!
I find it unlikely that your call is going to lead to a correct prosecution over a mugging, and further think that you need to counterbalance your want to feel better and more secure by calling big tough guys with guns with the very real prospect you're going to get someone else harassed, hurt, or killed.
> did you just assume police are mobile morons who serve no purpose other than to shoot and beat people?
I don't assume they're morons, nor that they think that's what their purpose is. However, they had to get investigated and forced in to a settlement by the federal DoJ for racially motivated policing and a record of unnecessary violence, including stomping a restrained man in a cell while screaming they'd beat "the Mexican piss out of him", regularly hassling the wrong black person who didn't even match the description given but just happened to be within a few blocks, and shooting a Native American woodcarver multiple times in the back while he was peacefully crossing the street because he was "armed" with a carving knife.
I didn't assume that they were psychotic thugs on a powertrip, no, they demonstrate that the police agency is completely unwilling to deal with these psychopaths in their ranks and instead will shield them from consequence. (They fought federal reform of their criminal policing tooth and nail - and still do to this day.)
When I go a month without hearing about how the local police brutally assaulted or murdered an innocent person, I'll stop acting like the local police force routinely assaults or murders citizens.
And until then, people calling the police need to realize that some police are psychopaths who will brutally assault or murder citizens in response to their call.
My brother, who is an awesome, gentle, smart, great dude, is training to become a police officer. I haven't talked to him much about it. I'm not exactly sure what to say. Your statements rings very true to me, though. For the first time, I'm a little worried for my little bro.
What's the difference between a gang member and a police officer? Social acceptance. They all engage in the same behavior, have their own rites and colors, and a shared identity and sense of loyalty to bend the rules for one another.
No- one set goes through an (at least semi-)standard training process, with public scrutiny upon their every action at a personal level with additional access to public records of most of their related actions, while the other is recruited through familial relations and contacts, with the media investigating the group with a view from a collective standpoint with far more limited resources available.
Perhaps it's useful to think of this as a spectrum rather than a stark distinction. In some places and at some times, police organizations behave in ways that we traditionally regard as "gang-like," while in other places and times, gangs behave in places that we think of as more "civic."
Not sure how it is in USA, but in Georgia (Europe), muggers are usually caught after 30-60 mins when you call police. And belongings are returned to you. Not necessary some luxury items... even your cheap cellphone [from 00s] counts.
There was a recent story about a lady who called the police when someone kicked in her door. She hid on the roof while the criminal looked for her. The police came and got the criminal and took her off the roof. Should she have not called the police when the guy kicked in her door?