The deal brings an end to a lawsuit brought last year by Officer Mathew Bianchi that claimed he’d been punished by his superiors for failing to honor the cards, though the settlement itself makes no substantive changes to how the cards are used by NYPD officers.
This is something that shouldn't exist. Just because someone is friends with or does a favor for a cop they get a "I don't have to follow the law card". WTF?!?!? Doesn't matter if it's only for...
This is something that shouldn't exist. Just because someone is friends with or does a favor for a cop they get a "I don't have to follow the law card". WTF?!?!? Doesn't matter if it's only for minor infractions. They are also depriving the city I assume of revenue for tickets. The cop that sued seems like one of the good ones. That chief and whoever else that is upholding/running this program needs a severe reprimand or demotion and it should stop, but I get the impression the program is still in operation.
It's pretty much a "get out of jail" card, but instead of being used in a game, they are used to absolve people of getting fined for things like speeding. There is a reason we have laws against...
It's pretty much a "get out of jail" card, but instead of being used in a game, they are used to absolve people of getting fined for things like speeding. There is a reason we have laws against this: speeding, for instance, has killed many. Disgusting stuff, and not the first instance of abuse of power coming from a US police force.
In a job designed to perpetuate state violence, there is no such thing. The only good cop is the one that quits. Edit: I expected to get responses I disagree with, but "state violence is good,...
The cop that sued seems like one of the good ones.
In a job designed to perpetuate state violence, there is no such thing. The only good cop is the one that quits.
Edit: I expected to get responses I disagree with, but "state violence is good, actually" was not among them. I think it's time I filter out the politics tag.
Unless you're a libertarian, I don't see the alternative to state violence. I'm not saying that police departments shouldn't be improved, and of course police unions play a big role in why police...
Exemplary
Unless you're a libertarian, I don't see the alternative to state violence. I'm not saying that police departments shouldn't be improved, and of course police unions play a big role in why police often don't get held accountable, but there's no perfect system. So as long as the system exists at all, violence, justified and unjustified, will occur, and the goal is to reduce it while ensuring that laws are enforced.
Even if you are a libertarian, that's just supporting market violence instead of state violence to some extent. If all protection of property etc. is private, there's even less accountability. It's the hard truth of life, life is sometimes violent. Stopping people from doing things you don't want them to do requires violence, or implicit threats of violence.
Yeah, state violence is of course bad, all violence is, but in a democratic society, the state having a legal monopoly on violence at least provides a potential avenue for accountability. I'd much...
Yeah, state violence is of course bad, all violence is, but in a democratic society, the state having a legal monopoly on violence at least provides a potential avenue for accountability. I'd much rather have someone who I pay to do violence under certain guidelines, and who is subject to my votes than an Elon musk death squad that just does whatever whoever pays them says.
Yes, and… Community control of the police. Democratize it. After all, we already believe the police ought “serve and protect.” But for whom? Often it’s those in power and influence, or property.
Yes, and…
Community control of the police. Democratize it. After all, we already believe the police ought “serve and protect.” But for whom? Often it’s those in power and influence, or property.
Respectfully, if you think state violence is bad, you should see the other kinds. As others have said, state violence provides the opportunity for accountability. There are abuses, but they are...
Exemplary
Respectfully, if you think state violence is bad, you should see the other kinds.
As others have said, state violence provides the opportunity for accountability. There are abuses, but they are not the accepted norm. People have many different avenues by which they can seek justice and correct the problem in the future.
State violence is also an equalizer. I am a slim male of average height with no violent tendencies. A larger, stronger person with a higher capacity for violence is not free to take what he wants from me without consequence. I can call on the state to protect me, or to help me seek justice after the fact.
Look at the violent labor battles in 19th century American company towns to see an example of what happens when brutal police forces are accountable only to a single person or business. This was true in history and it remains true today. Cartels in South and Central America, gangs in Haiti, the list goes on. Good luck getting justice or safety from these groups if you have nothing to offer them. You are perhaps even worse off if you do have something they want.
I'm pretty liberal and I obviously think a healthy democracy needs to stamp out abuse of power every single time. But when I hear my hardcore leftie friends start saying that police shouldn't exist, I struggle to understand how they think their idealism is going to mesh with reality.
Best case scenario would be Musk/Benzos goon squads operating with medium levels of impunity to protect consumers and capital. Worst case is a power vacuum filled by the worst of the worst gang members with unlimited capacity for cruelty and violence.
It does not, in fact, do any of this. State monopolies on violence mean the state gets to dictate what kinds of violence are acceptable, and they have. Police abuses of power are very much the...
As others have said, state violence provides the opportunity for accountability. There are abuses, but they are not the accepted norm.
It does not, in fact, do any of this. State monopolies on violence mean the state gets to dictate what kinds of violence are acceptable, and they have. Police abuses of power are very much the accepted norm; we just pretend otherwise.
State violence is also an equalizer.
This tells me you've lived a privileged life, and/or never had a truly bad run in with the cops before.
Look at the violent labor battles in 19th century American company towns to see an example of what happens when brutal police forces are accountable only to a single person or business.
You mean the labor battles that state violence helped perpetuate? Stuff like the Battle of Blair Mountain, which the U.S. government participated in on the side of the companies?
I'm pretty liberal and I obviously think a healthy democracy needs to stamp out abuse of power every single time. But when I hear my hardcore leftie friends start saying that police shouldn't exist, I struggle to understand how they think their idealism is going to mesh with reality.
This is because you've grown extremely accustomed to the society that exists today, to such a degree that you have difficulty imagining what radical change would even look like. A great many are like you. It's not unusual.
But cops are an antagonistic solution, and are designed as such. For this reason, they will never be justice.
I will not be responding to any further comments, as I have no interest in continuing a debate when this site's consensus appears to be that state violence is perfectly acceptable.
I know you've said you don't want to respond to any further comments, but I was wondering if you could describe what kind of change you're talking about. I'm not being sarcastic or anything...
I know you've said you don't want to respond to any further comments, but I was wondering if you could describe what kind of change you're talking about.
I'm not being sarcastic or anything either. I'm genuinely very interested to hear what you have in mind. I'm open to new ideas! Help me understand.
This is the first time I'm hearing about "courtesy cards", and it seems insane that they're tolerated at all. I'm a public servant myself, and it's drilled into us that there are very clear ethics...
This is the first time I'm hearing about "courtesy cards", and it seems insane that they're tolerated at all.
I'm a public servant myself, and it's drilled into us that there are very clear ethics guidelines. I'm appointed by the citizens of my municipality to do a job, and I'm paid by their taxes and trusted to serve them fairly. As such, I'm very, very careful to not use my position for any sort of personal benefit. The compensation I get is my paycheck and benefits package, and nothing more. I don't accept free gifts from outside vendors, I don't use my position to enhance my life, and I especially don't use my position to give my friends and families special benefits. Why should they get special treatment on the taxpayers dime just because they know me?
I'm guessing this is something that the police unions have strong armed the city into allowing, but it should absolutely be made illegal via legislation. It's not morally right at all.
I had one of those cards from when my sister was briefly with NYPD. I also had a small badge in a wallet type of thing that said "officer's brother," presumably meant to be kept in the glove...
I had one of those cards from when my sister was briefly with NYPD. I also had a small badge in a wallet type of thing that said "officer's brother," presumably meant to be kept in the glove compartment of my car or something. It definitely felt scummy to even have them, but I did keep them for a couple of years in case they ever might have come in handy. For me it wasn't so much about getting out of tickets as it was about defusing any encounter I might have with a cop having a bad night. Anyway, it eventually became a moot point, as I got rid of my car a couple of years later.
Not sure why I expected real change.
This is something that shouldn't exist. Just because someone is friends with or does a favor for a cop they get a "I don't have to follow the law card". WTF?!?!? Doesn't matter if it's only for minor infractions. They are also depriving the city I assume of revenue for tickets. The cop that sued seems like one of the good ones. That chief and whoever else that is upholding/running this program needs a severe reprimand or demotion and it should stop, but I get the impression the program is still in operation.
It's pretty much a "get out of jail" card, but instead of being used in a game, they are used to absolve people of getting fined for things like speeding. There is a reason we have laws against this: speeding, for instance, has killed many. Disgusting stuff, and not the first instance of abuse of power coming from a US police force.
In a job designed to perpetuate state violence, there is no such thing. The only good cop is the one that quits.
Edit: I expected to get responses I disagree with, but "state violence is good, actually" was not among them. I think it's time I filter out the politics tag.
Unless you're a libertarian, I don't see the alternative to state violence. I'm not saying that police departments shouldn't be improved, and of course police unions play a big role in why police often don't get held accountable, but there's no perfect system. So as long as the system exists at all, violence, justified and unjustified, will occur, and the goal is to reduce it while ensuring that laws are enforced.
Even if you are a libertarian, that's just supporting market violence instead of state violence to some extent. If all protection of property etc. is private, there's even less accountability. It's the hard truth of life, life is sometimes violent. Stopping people from doing things you don't want them to do requires violence, or implicit threats of violence.
Yeah, state violence is of course bad, all violence is, but in a democratic society, the state having a legal monopoly on violence at least provides a potential avenue for accountability. I'd much rather have someone who I pay to do violence under certain guidelines, and who is subject to my votes than an Elon musk death squad that just does whatever whoever pays them says.
Yes, and…
Community control of the police. Democratize it. After all, we already believe the police ought “serve and protect.” But for whom? Often it’s those in power and influence, or property.
This is honest to god the best written example of why the concept of police is good, that I've ever seen.
Respectfully, if you think state violence is bad, you should see the other kinds.
As others have said, state violence provides the opportunity for accountability. There are abuses, but they are not the accepted norm. People have many different avenues by which they can seek justice and correct the problem in the future.
State violence is also an equalizer. I am a slim male of average height with no violent tendencies. A larger, stronger person with a higher capacity for violence is not free to take what he wants from me without consequence. I can call on the state to protect me, or to help me seek justice after the fact.
Look at the violent labor battles in 19th century American company towns to see an example of what happens when brutal police forces are accountable only to a single person or business. This was true in history and it remains true today. Cartels in South and Central America, gangs in Haiti, the list goes on. Good luck getting justice or safety from these groups if you have nothing to offer them. You are perhaps even worse off if you do have something they want.
I'm pretty liberal and I obviously think a healthy democracy needs to stamp out abuse of power every single time. But when I hear my hardcore leftie friends start saying that police shouldn't exist, I struggle to understand how they think their idealism is going to mesh with reality.
Best case scenario would be Musk/Benzos goon squads operating with medium levels of impunity to protect consumers and capital. Worst case is a power vacuum filled by the worst of the worst gang members with unlimited capacity for cruelty and violence.
It does not, in fact, do any of this. State monopolies on violence mean the state gets to dictate what kinds of violence are acceptable, and they have. Police abuses of power are very much the accepted norm; we just pretend otherwise.
This tells me you've lived a privileged life, and/or never had a truly bad run in with the cops before.
You mean the labor battles that state violence helped perpetuate? Stuff like the Battle of Blair Mountain, which the U.S. government participated in on the side of the companies?
This is because you've grown extremely accustomed to the society that exists today, to such a degree that you have difficulty imagining what radical change would even look like. A great many are like you. It's not unusual.
But cops are an antagonistic solution, and are designed as such. For this reason, they will never be justice.
I will not be responding to any further comments, as I have no interest in continuing a debate when this site's consensus appears to be that state violence is perfectly acceptable.
I know you've said you don't want to respond to any further comments, but I was wondering if you could describe what kind of change you're talking about.
I'm not being sarcastic or anything either. I'm genuinely very interested to hear what you have in mind. I'm open to new ideas! Help me understand.
This is the first time I'm hearing about "courtesy cards", and it seems insane that they're tolerated at all.
I'm a public servant myself, and it's drilled into us that there are very clear ethics guidelines. I'm appointed by the citizens of my municipality to do a job, and I'm paid by their taxes and trusted to serve them fairly. As such, I'm very, very careful to not use my position for any sort of personal benefit. The compensation I get is my paycheck and benefits package, and nothing more. I don't accept free gifts from outside vendors, I don't use my position to enhance my life, and I especially don't use my position to give my friends and families special benefits. Why should they get special treatment on the taxpayers dime just because they know me?
I'm guessing this is something that the police unions have strong armed the city into allowing, but it should absolutely be made illegal via legislation. It's not morally right at all.
After clicking on the card link in the article, I saw this:
This is just bribery with extra steps...
I had one of those cards from when my sister was briefly with NYPD. I also had a small badge in a wallet type of thing that said "officer's brother," presumably meant to be kept in the glove compartment of my car or something. It definitely felt scummy to even have them, but I did keep them for a couple of years in case they ever might have come in handy. For me it wasn't so much about getting out of tickets as it was about defusing any encounter I might have with a cop having a bad night. Anyway, it eventually became a moot point, as I got rid of my car a couple of years later.