Lion of the Blogosphere

Is police brutality a good thing?

with 42 comments

Commenter Garr writes:

Police brutality is a good thing. Instead of charging people with crimes, police should just beat them up and let them go. This would be cheaper, have a more powerful deterrent effect, and be less damaging to beaten thugs in the long run than losing years of their lives in prison.

Given the collateral consequences of being involved with the criminal justice system (merely an on-the-record arrest, with no conviction or prosecution, can ruin a person’s employability), yes, I think one is better off getting an extra-judicial beating by the cops than being officially arrested and prosecuted.

Plus, psychologically, the effect of immediate punishment is more effective in deterring future bad behavior than the slow drip-drip-drip of the criminal justice system. Punishing a dog or a cat a day after it does something wrong has zero deterrent effect. Human criminals are closer to animals than smart high future-time-orientation elites realize.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

November 12, 2017 at 12:42 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

42 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Bravo @ the title. I laughed.

    Ishmael

    November 12, 2017 at 12:57 pm

  2. Yeah but it would suck if you were at the mercy at a crazy one when you didn’t really do anything wrong and his cop buddies won’t keep him in check.

    Kaz

    November 12, 2017 at 1:03 pm

  3. Criminals should be killed not beaten. What a weird idea!

    Yakov

    November 12, 2017 at 1:38 pm

    • Repeat criminals should be killed.

      If beatings straighten out some before that, great.

      Steve Johnson

      November 13, 2017 at 12:44 am

  4. But what about the idea of being innocent until proven guilty? Is this just a pipe dream?

    The title of this post brought me to mind of the Air India flight 182 bombing, of 1985. 329 people were killed.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_India_Flight_182

    “investigation and prosecution lasted almost twenty years and was the most expensive trial in Canadian history, costing nearly CAD 130 million. ”

    Yet only one person was convicted. The mastermind of the bombing, Talwinder Singh Parmar, somehow ended up back in India where it is believed he was killed while in police custody, He had been a Canadian citizen and made a big mistake going back to India, but it is fortunate that he did.

    Several years before the bombing India had warned Canada that Parmar was a terrorist and tried to extradite him. But Canada wouldn’t send him back to India. Despite massive time, effort and expense, the Canadian legal system wasn’t able to cope with the situation. Two witnesses were murdered during the trial.

    Rosenmops

    November 12, 2017 at 2:10 pm

    • The terrorists you mention are still very openly celebrated as martyrs by some segments of the community. The Sikh terror incidents which took place in the 1980s were in some senses also a foreshadowing of the Muslim terror attacks which began from 9/11 going forward. The Liberal Party of Canada has done much to coddle terrorist sympathizers within the country and disturbingly, to this day the Liberals remains beholden to key electoral ridings with large Sikh populations.

      Roli

      November 12, 2017 at 8:22 pm

      • And now the NDP has a turban-wearing Sikh as leader, Jagmeet Singh. And he refuses to come out and condemn Talwinder Singh Parmar (the mastermind of the Air India bombing).

        http://torontosun.com/2017/10/03/jagmeet-singh-fails-his-first-test-of-leadership/wcm/885bdb49-c6b4-488c-b905-a193ffca14ba

        Rosenmops

        November 13, 2017 at 12:25 am

      • Agreed, but with two like minded men at the helm of the Liberal and NDP parties, they risk splitting the ethnic and sjw voter blocks and with any luck ushering the Conservatives into power. It seems safe to assume that all of Trudeau’s kowtowing to the Sikhs went up in smoke the moment Singh became an option in the next election, and Trudeau as dumb as he is, understands this.

        Roli

        November 13, 2017 at 11:36 am

      • “with two like minded men at the helm of the Liberal and NDP parties, they risk splitting the ethnic and sjw voter blocks and with any luck ushering the Conservatives into power.”

        We can only hope.

        Rosenmops

        November 13, 2017 at 5:47 pm

  5. I’m all for corporal punishment. People with really high time preference might be too dumb to feel motivated by the threat of years in prison, but everyone understands what getting hit feels like.

    Being in favor of police brutality means the same thing except your skip the judicial process and just have the police decide who needs a beat down. The advantage is that that works much better on high time preference people.

    Most people would reject this solution because a) the cops might make a mistake and beat up the wrong person. Every time they do that, it undermines law and order rather than enforcing it; b) once they realise that they are now judge and jury, some cops won’t even try to beat up the right person. They’ll beat up innocent parties for sadism or extortion. Every time the system punishes an innocent person that is both a case where the guilty party got away and an additional instance of crime created direclty by the system.

    Greg Pandatshang

    November 12, 2017 at 2:52 pm

  6. That’s exactly the fine reasoning of charia. And they had jail punish families and societies. The problem with corporal punishment is that is not compatible with a one-tier only justice because elite don’t accept to be brutalized (because the punishment is effective only if it is brutal, else people don’t care). It creates hypocrisy.

    Bruno

    November 12, 2017 at 3:35 pm

  7. This system would work well in a more-or-less functional country like the USA, where most police officers behave within the established guidelines, despite a few rotten apples. But it would never work in a rancorous low-IQ country like Turkey or Morocco or Mexico, because their rancorous low-IQ police officers would mainly be interested in self-gain, and would therefore consistently take advantage of their license-to-beat. It also wouldn’t work in most Western European countries today, where the police have become too weak and frightened to do even the most basic police work (witness the new European no-go areas). But, when the current generation of effeminate and HBD-unaware European leaders gets replaced by a new generation of HBD-woke leaders, that problem will fix itself. There are already early signs of this turnaround taking place in e.g. Poland, Hungary, Austria, and elsewhere. Those are also the countries that have been the most steely in rejecting the influx of low-quality third-world immigrants, and as such they will also have the least need for this type of get-tough policing. The USA and most of Western Europe, on the other hand, have already saddled themselves with so many low-quality immigrants that they will need to rely on a violence-ready police force for the foreseeable future.

    Chetty

    November 12, 2017 at 4:04 pm

    • I dare you not to laugh at this:

      Steve Johnson

      November 13, 2017 at 12:52 am

      • Liberal fantasy meets hard truth.

        Roli

        November 13, 2017 at 12:50 pm

  8. Yes. But it is to be ignored rather than encouraged. If the police beat the wrong person, they still need to pay.

    Clay

    November 12, 2017 at 4:05 pm

  9. NYC cops carry nightsticks. And shit, did they used to use them! I remember those days. They would tell you to “get off the cawnah” and push you with their nightstick. Now it would be called police brutality.

    I think the proper name is baton.

    gothamette

    November 12, 2017 at 4:33 pm

  10. OT but this morning I heard Chuck Todd ask some Repub senator whether the Senate should refuse to seat Moore. Is that even possible? Seemed like a stupid question.

    vipltd

    November 12, 2017 at 4:37 pm

    • OT but this morning I heard Chuck Todd ask some Repub senator whether the Senate should refuse to seat Moore. Is that even possible? Seemed like a stupid question.

      They have the Constitutional power to refuse to seat a Senator.

      But it should be made on the condition the Democrats agree to vote to expel Bob Menendez (who also seems to have enjoyed the company of underage girls in the Dominican Republic) and have outgoing Governor Chris Christie replace him, regardless of what the jury rules in Menendez’s corruption trial.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      November 12, 2017 at 6:54 pm

      • I’ve been searching for an article by any constitutional scholar which supports your position, but all I’ve found is one contra.

        vipltd

        November 12, 2017 at 10:40 pm

  11. There is no one size fits all and you certainly wouldn’t want to see policemen physically attacking middle-class kids for possession of small amounts of pot. However, the likes of Antifa and America’s ghetto psychopaths are a completely different story, and the police should be with in it’s rights to crush them with tanks when required.

    Roli

    November 12, 2017 at 5:08 pm

  12. I have wondered if bringing back shame might work on the shameless. Like, the stocks. Maybe people wouldn’t think being a criminal was cool if you had to sit in the public square while kids threw dog feces at you. Unfortunately some people think going to jail is a badge of honor.

    Then again, progressive chuck beards would probably just fellate the “stocked” criminals to show their commitment to the cause.

    Joe

    November 12, 2017 at 5:20 pm

    • Cuck beards, that is

      Joe

      November 12, 2017 at 6:48 pm

  13. How are cops today supposed to give beatings to criminals when they can’t even overpower children?

    Peter

    ironrailsironweights

    November 12, 2017 at 5:32 pm

  14. I had a friend, a Puerto Rican, who grew up in San Juan. His father was a detective on the police force. One evening he was dispatched to the airport to pick up a visiting FBI agent. As they were returning to the city, they stopped to assist a group of men with a broken down car. It turned out to be a pretense for a robbery. Bad choice! The cops drew their guns and got the drop on the bad guys. The FBI agent wanted to handcuff them and take them to jail, but the local guy said no. He told the FBI man to keep them covered while he beat the crap out of each one. Mr FBI was instructed to shoot anyone who resisted or tried to get away (none did). That’s how they handled the problem in Puerto Rico!

    Black Death

    November 12, 2017 at 5:38 pm

  15. Peter Hitchens wrote a book about British policing that changed my view on the subject. Before the various changes to the role and procedures of the police in the past 60 years, a big part of the policeman’s job would be to patrol his beat, get to know who the bad characters were, and if necessary, I suppose, keep them in line. It’s a system that worked and society was the freer and safer for it.

    prolier than thou

    November 12, 2017 at 6:05 pm

    • Yeah but back in the day everyone knew everyone. Now no one knows anyone. Or anything. I don’t know anything. I barely know my own name. I’ve forgotten my age. My weight? That’s a military secret.

      gothamette

      November 12, 2017 at 7:43 pm

    • Japan has a similar system and it still operates. For example, each Japanese cop is assigned individual pockets of the city to manage, with say anywhere up to 2000 households within the area. As a part of his duties, each cop makes the rounds of each house under his control area, at least once a year often in the guise of a very short social visit to say hello and have tea. Following the visit, the intrepid cop makes notes about the household, flagging anything that appears concerning, for example, a delinquent looking teenager or shady dad. The end result is that communities remain connected with and trustful of the police and the police have an excellent insights into the people of their assigned areas and it all adds up to much success. Japan as a whole, including large metropolitan areas like Tokyo are renowned for being safe, secure and in relative terms very, very crime free. (Note, organized crime syndicates like the mafia still flourish, outside of the police’s control.) The fact that the country accepts almost no immigration and has retained its distinct homogeneous and cohesiveness no doubt helps the situation much.

      Roli

      November 12, 2017 at 8:01 pm

    • I remember reading an article about British policing in the past. A retired bobby recalled that in his day, “We knew how to be nice to the nice people, and nasty to the nasty people.”

      Around the time of the Rodney King beating, I knew a cop in the US. He told me that it was pretty much standard practice to beat suspects who ran on foot or drove like maniacs in an attempt to get away. He wasn’t in any way apologetic about it, but he also said that it didn’t really have anything to do with race. Black cops would smack around both black and white suspects who ran, as would white cops. Cops really don’t like having to chase people down, in part because it forces them into some very dangerous situations where they may wind up getting shot.

      I’m not advocating it as a solution, jsut recounting it as an anecdote.

      ice hole

      November 12, 2017 at 11:54 pm

      • Even Ron Kuby, a radical left-wing lawyer, believes that cops are justified in beating suspects who lead them on high-speed car chases.

        Lewis Medlock

        November 13, 2017 at 10:02 am

      • “Around the time of the Rodney King beating, I knew a cop in the US. He told me that it was pretty much standard practice to beat suspects who ran on foot or drove like maniacs in an attempt to get away.” I think that used to be standard procedure for US policing. I knew a former policeman around the time of the Rodney King incident who defended the beating for the same reasons you mentioned. High speed chases look great on TV but they are extremely dangerous to civilians in real life.

        Mike Street Station

        November 14, 2017 at 8:14 am

    • ” It’s a system that worked and society was the freer and safer for it.”

      That seems like a pretty good informal system that works in a homogeneous, high trust society. That doesn’t describe the United States anymore, so I don’t think police beatings to keep shady characters in line is practical, although if I were arrested for something like drunk driving, I’d much rather take the beating and get dropped off at home than go through the legal circus that will make me permanently unemployable.

      Mike Street Station

      November 14, 2017 at 8:11 am

  16. Lion is obviously trolling, but on a serious note there are hundreds of thousands if not millions of criminals that need to be disposed of. They are hopeless. The country is importing tens of thousands more right now. It’s a total mess.

    Yakov

    November 12, 2017 at 7:12 pm

  17. Don’t neoreactionaries who are “against human rights” argue that corporal punishment would often times be more humane and more cost effective than incarcerating people for certain crimes?

    “Human criminals are closer to animals than smart high future-time-orientation elites realize.”

    Maybe. I’ve met people in jail who were facing long prison sentences who genuinely didn’t seem to care about how much time they were facing, up to about 10 years. They weren’t usually sociopaths. Individual and group differences in time preference seems to be a real thing.

    Horace Pinker

    November 12, 2017 at 7:12 pm

    • That isn’t responsive to Lion’s assertion.

      Mort

      November 12, 2017 at 10:46 pm

    • Interesting. Years ago I met a guy (briefly) who was on his way to do five years in a state pentientiary on an assualt charge (there was a gun involved). He was quite calm about the prospect — he’d been in prison before — and was looking forward to the structure and orderliness of the state prison as compared to the county jail, where he was temporarily being held.

      He wasn’t nervous or angry about his sentence. He acknowledged it could easily have been longer, and that the judge had cut him some slack at only five years. It might as well have been a business transaction to him though obviously he wasn’t somebody you would want to piss off.

      Most of us don’t deal with such people much, or if we do, we don’t recognize what they’re capable of. This guy was respectable looking, clean cut, and for someone of his ilk, articulate and apparently intelligent, or at least, ienough not to be leading this kind of life.

      ice hole

      November 13, 2017 at 12:10 am

      • That guy sounds like someone who’s a sociopath or someone who’s on that spectrum. After you spend a few months in jail, time starts to seem a little weird. Days can seem very long while weeks and months seem to fly by. This feeling certainly isn’t unique to people who are incarcerated, but incarceration seems to magnify it in some way. TBH, five years in prison doesn’t sound that long to me and state prisons tend to be a lot nicer than county jails. They’re far less violent, for one thing.

        Horace Pinker

        November 13, 2017 at 6:16 pm

  18. After the recent attack in NYC all my Tajiks and Uzbeks were expecting a complete ban on on entry into the country. Nothing happened. Tell me this country ain’t a mess? Why the hell it needs to bring them here? Imbeciles.

    Yakov

    November 12, 2017 at 7:15 pm

  19. it would be a good thing except there’d be a lot more ‘false positives”.

    the cops would beat up a lot more innocent people.

    there is a middle ground between soviet justice under stalin and oecd justice.

    but you’d still want it to be legalized brutality. not just tolerated brutality.

    …i gotta be driftin’ along…

    ron burgundy

    November 12, 2017 at 7:39 pm

  20. Beating people?

    How would cops know who to beat?

    Sure, if they were victims of crimes…maybe.

    But why not simply allow concealed carry and let the criminals try their luck with armed civilians?

    map

    November 13, 2017 at 3:06 am

  21. Regardless of whether police brutality is good public policy, it is against the law. Conservative judges who let the police get away with it are fundamentally the same as liberal judges who discover Constitutional rights to gay marriage or for Muslims to immigrate.

    fortaleza84

    November 13, 2017 at 3:57 am

    • As a lawyer, I can tell you that when cops “get away with” violating son’s civil rights, it’s usually because of some statutory immunity granted by the legislature, not because of the attitude of the judge(s).

      mel belli

      November 13, 2017 at 11:09 am

  22. Just move to an Islamic country, they already have beatings and amputations. Or if that isn’t barbaric enough foryou then go live in the jungle with the gorillas and orangutans, the alpha male usually just beats everyone else into submission.

    DataExplorer

    November 13, 2017 at 9:50 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: