I'm pretty fine here, when I make a code mistake I can fix it, and I'm paid so much more than a cop.
I suppose that would be a good reason for me to bitch about cops in general right ?
At least, that's what it seems when I read comments on hn the last days.
The police unquestionably have a hard job, and are granted immense powers to do it. We all know what comes with great power. But if the single group of people endowed with the authority to deny you your rights is not held to the highest of standards, can anyone be surprised that so many are having their rights, and even their lives, taken from them?
How exactly do you plan to absolutely eliminate any mistake from policing ?
You know, what we explain to antivaxx people, is that the benefits largely outweight the inconvenience, that's just basic pragmatism.
No other job functions this way. Why do we let the profession with the power to use deadly force function this way?
Kneeling on someone's neck for 8 minutes and 46 seconds is not a mistake. Shooting someone in their own home after you serve a no-knock warrant is not a mistake. Shoving an old man to the ground and walking past his bleeding body is not a mistake. Even if the officer didn't intend to kill someone, someone is now dead.
If we trust police with the authority over life and death (and really, I don't think we should), we should at least hold them to the highest and strictest standards of conduct.
And every time they shipped a bug someone died?
You might be inclined to improve the process, right?
I won't belabor the analogy. Campaign Zero has a great summary of the policy changes that can help: https://www.joincampaignzero.org/solutions
If you want to make the development argument, then you should know that bugs are unavoidable. Even from the best developers in the world. No amount of code reviews, tests, or processes will change that.
Can you reduce? Of course. By a really large amount? Probably. But "zero" is an impossible goal. The statement "We can live in a world where the police don't kill people" just makes you look dumb and naive.
8cantwait.org at least has a realistic number backed by studies.
Zero is the only reasonable target. Every death should be treated as a process and policy failure. Every death should lead to an improvement.
It will be a long way to get there, but as JFK said, we do these things not because they are easy.
(I'll also point out that 8cantwait.org is a Campaign Zero project. Thank you for linking it.)
I said that we should take actions that have been shown to improve the situation. 8canwait.org goes over many of them, and I'm sure there are lots of other actions we can take as well.
Zero is impossible without a perfect populous. It is the enemy of 8canwait (and I know, it was created by people who think zero is possible).
Someone saying "zero is possible" makes it seem like they don't understand the situation enough to have a real conversation about it.
To answer your question directly, to address systemic racism in America we need to shift the Overton window of discourse. That _requires_ dissemination of values and ideas which many consider radical or unthinkable.
Beyond that, to say someone is dumb and naive because they don't think cops should be allowed to kill people is callous and ignorant when you consider blacks are three times more likely to be killed by police than whites. [https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/]
"Zero is impossible" is implicitly saying, "Cops should be allowed to kill people." Easy to say when it's not your community in the crosshairs.