This post and the article have the same problem: Thinking the way police works/seems to work in the US (always out to get you) is universal to the world while it is the exception. Police in other countries usually works out of a desire to help.
But in this scenario the police are unprompted at your door and their first ask is to come into your house.
If the police just want to talk to you because they're concerned about you personally they'll just ask to talk to you in a place they wouldn't otherwise need a search warrant signed by a judge to enter.
"Their first ask is to come into your house" is based on a quote Vice took out of context (and then blew up into a nice big sub-headline to give it a bit more 'emotional weight').
The second part .. if the police is concerned about you they ask to talk to you where they meet you. For the type of person where this intervention happens this will probably be their home most of the time.
I always wonder where people get this idea that the police (and law enforcement in general) are all crooks breaking/bending the law to get you, but will have a problem to get a warrant if that's really what they want. Maybe too many crime shows?
Bitter experience. Never underestimate the dishonesty of a cop.
Or rather, the lack of incentive for a person in a position of power, to not use that power for their own interests and at their whims.
No, police aren't all out to get you. But you'd be dumb even in Iceland not to have some basic situational awareness and consider how that interaction started out. You didn't come to them on the street, they sought you out at your home.
So if the police knock on your door open up and talk to them there. If they just want to talk you you they'll be happy to do that there. If they seem more interested in going inside your house than having a chat with you at the door perhaps they're really there for something else.
Hedging against that by doing something that costs you maybe 5 seconds ("let's just chat here") is just common sense.
The police can wait outside in case they’re needed.
Police are decidedly not mental healthcare professionals.
The police gets to do that kind of rather unpleasant jobs. Not their fault.
But some are. Some will plant drugs on you.
The one knocking on your door now, is it a good cop or a bad cop?
The police have immense power, you do not.
What do you have to gain from interacting with the police? Now, compare this to what you stand to lose by interacting with the police.
The rule is simple: don't interact with the police. They are not your friends, anything you do or say can and will be used against you at a whim.
Do not romanticize other countries, please.
It would make their job more difficult, it doesn't automatically follow that they would be less effective. They might be as effective with less data if most of the data was noise, or be more effective by concentrating their efforts on fewer interactions and getting much better results from that, or become as effective or better by having to work harder. Or it might push them to develop different and better techniques.
The job of the police is to help me. To do that effectively they have to sometimes talk to me. It is therefore in my interest to talk to them.
https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-po...
You are in for a big, big surprise. Hope your naivety does not get you in too much trouble.
Policing means arbitrating in a dispute even when no laws have been broken, helping those in our community incapable of helping themselves (accident victims, people whose meds are off). It doesn't really mean the regular use of violent force or even the threat of an immediate death penalty to gain compliance with a personally conveyed order. Tht's not justice and it's arguably not even law enforcement.
This is the bottom line. 90% of police that I have personally interacted with (even when I've been in the wrong) have been absolute professionals and, I believe, genuinely good people. The other 10% are why I'm polite but cautious.
The larger your surface area the more likely you will have problems.
It makes sense. Law enforcement is looking for someone to blame for crimes. You interact enough you might just fit a profile.
Police never lose pay for misjudging anyone.
This is an important point.
Police are a bureaucracy with all the same incentives and problems inherent to that structure.
They are seldom penalized for being wrong (even if someone gets shot/killed as a result) but they do miss out on promotions for not closing enough cases (or writing enough citations).
Detectives under pressure will absolutely name weak suspects to achieve these ends and let the courts sort it out.
Nope. I can't agree with this, as much as I wish I could. It's an easy fallacy to think the U.S. is the exception when it comes to power mad, duplicitous and hostile bullies in the police force since they're the ones getting the bulk of the media coverage. We have them in Canada, too. Yes, they're fewer in numbers, but that's not to say we don't have them. It's easy to assume other countries or cultures are innocent of a problem just because they have a lower, or perhaps invisible, prevalence of that problem.
Source: I'm a Canadian (who used to think exactly this way) with family members in the emergency services, including one estranged, asshole bully of a cop who'd happily harass someone and construct a charge if they looked at him the wrong way.
Your local mafia clan are also nice people as long as you play by their rules (you can study organized crime in favelas where it is an ordering element similar to police).
https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/22530/does-the-...
I'm on your side. Please don't make our shared side weaker by using poor arguments.
A "sceptics" link is hardly refutation. These sites attract professional "minor detail pickers" and "technically-correct" pedants, who more often than not miss the forest for the trees.
The message is not the exact number of felonies per time period, it's that people can have all kind of laws broken and given causes to be arrested without them knowing it.
Even if it's 1 felony per month or 1 per year it's still more than enough, and that's the point of "thee felonies a day".
Maybe I've only seen the uglier parts of the world, but that statement is what seems to be the exception rather than the norm, and a dangerously naive assumption.
People rarely see themselves as the bad guys. To understand people's motivations it's usually helpful to understand that they are just trying to do what they think is is best.
It's just that the disconnect between what is best for you, and what is in the interest of a member of the police often enough doesn't align, and this is the case everywhere, not specific to the US.
From my experience in India, Unless you are rich, you should try to stay away from police as much as possible, cause they can really fuck your life up.
As for other things they want to talk about, that's fine, as long as you bear in mind the following. First, in many countries police has to investigate any suspicion of a criminal offence even if it is unrelated to the initial investigation. In many countries, police has no leeway about that even if they claim the opposite. Second, the police often investigate someone as a mere witness before formally charging the person for a crime, because that's easier to start with.
You specified western Hemisphere, which includes only the eastmost edge of Europe, but still leaves (half) of the UK, France and also Canada and Ireland. US police is hardly going to beat those on many positive metrics.
Odd choice of geographic region for such a comparison in any case.
The latter is like competing with your college football team against a selection of mostly primary schoolers and declaring you're doing fine.
That's just not an aspirational goal or useful comparison.
The punishments can vary so much.
Private prisons create this profit incentive to jail more people.
Prisions should be a cost center not a profit center.
I wholeheartedly agree that 6% of the prison population (128,063 people!) is a situation worthwhile of positive change. But I remain skeptical that it's those damn private prisons that are ruining everything. Mostly I think it's debacles like the drug war that need real immediate attention and change before things will significantly improve.
[0]https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/11/u-s-private...
[1]https://www.bjs.gov/content/keystatistics/csv/Total_correcti...
[2]https://www.criminaljusticeprograms.com/articles/private-pri... again citing the BJS.
False in my experience. Maybe I haven't found the right countries.
[0] https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/06/19/canada-police-fail-indig...
IMHO, policing based on mass surveillance goes way too far.