this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2026
951 points (97.8% liked)

THE POLICE PROBLEM

4289 readers
783 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I just wrote this in response to another post, but it applies here, so please forgive me for the cut & paste:

This is an important subject that doesn't get ANY discussion. The type of gun makes a HUGE difference in these cases.

Military assault rifles aren't much different than a standard hunting rifle, like a Ruger. And yet, they are overwhelmingly the choice of most mass shooters. When was the last time you heard of a shooter using a standard hunting rifle?

The reason is psychological. Nobody would dispute that anyone who has committed to a mass shooting is psychologically compromised, and so their warped psychology has to be applied to everything they do, especially their choice of weapon.

The overall objective of any mass shooter is to show the world that they are someone powerful who should be taken seriously. They feel weak and victimized, and it's time to turn the tables. They want their victims to feel fear, and shame, and humiliation as they cower at the end of their gun, and to that end, they need a big scary black weapon to impress not only his victims, but himself. That gun provides the psychological motivation to carry out their mission. Other weapons may be scary, and equally lethal, but they don't have nearly the same psychological effect on either the victims or the shooter.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised at all if gun manufacturers recognize this, and actually design guns to appeal to this particular psychological profile. I expect it. After all, whenever there is a school massacre, gun sales for this type of weapon go up. School shootings are among their best marketing.

It wouldn't be the first time corporations have done something that evil. Tobacco manufacturers covered up their own studies confirming tobacco addiction and cancer, and marketed against it for years, even as they manipulated their formulas to be more addictive, addict people faster, and make it harder to quit. Oil companies knew about Climate Change from their own studies years before it became widely known, and still deny it to this day. Evil companies do shit like that routinely, and it's hard to imagine a more evil industry than arms manufacturing.

So we can ban assault weapons, without banning hunting rifles with the same lethal potential, because standard hunting rifles aren't designed to attract and inflame the most psychologically broken individuals in our society.

And BTW, just because the VTech killer used handguns, does not negate the truth about MOST mass shooters using military style weapons. It's still a fact in most massacres.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

I will agree with most of your points, the point that I was making is that I would like some gun legislation that actually bans those guns, not the cosmetics.

Sure it just looks like a hunting rifle, but someone that wants to use my AR-15 or M-16 for something like that, would still be able to do so, and they can order the tacticool shit online and change out the stocks with a few turns of a screw. I shouldn't have been able to buy the platform. The cosmetics aren't an effective ban.