Blocking people from talking about it — you know, "prior restraint" — is emphatically not the solution.
Blocking people from talking about it — you know, "prior restraint" — is emphatically not the solution.
This survey contradicts that assertion: http://www.aele.org/loscode2000.html
From the survey:
`In response to “Please describe the first time you witnessed misconduct by another employee but took no action,” 46 percent (532) advised they had witnessed misconduct by another employee, but concealed what they knew.`
If we can trust the survey results, methodology, etc, the minority of which you speak is 46%.
The 46% you cite numbers among the latter. For all you know, though, the people those 46% are talking about having seen committing "misconduct" are the same folks over and over.
I'm not downplaying police abuses, and I'm not excusing the people who don't speak up and call it out when it occurs, but I think it remains useful to make a distinction between them.
And yet:
> but conceal or misrepresent what they've seen.
That's lying. They're accomplices to the abuse and worse, perpetual enablers of it.
Apologies for veering the thread off-topic. I'm just bothered by the notion of "it's just a few bad apples."
- from http://www.vox.com/2015/5/28/8661977/race-police-officer
So if K.L. Williams, "who has trained thousands of officers around the country in use of force", is right, the 15% bad actors (your "overwhelming minority") turns into 85%. That is consistent with not just the survey troym links to, but the experiences described by those people victimized by police injustice. I doubt many HN readers are in that population.
The locksmith said to him "Locks aren't for people like me. If someone wants to break in, a lock isn't going to stop them. 15% of people will try to steal no matter what you do. 15% will never take anything even if you leave your door while open. Locks are for that 70% in the middle that will steal if the opportunity is right."