Hacker News Reader

Comment by jeffbee | Hacker News Reader

Cops can't get fired for anything short of shooting a child in the back on live TV and, sometimes, not even for that. California sheriffs are elected and can't be fired at all. The Alameda County (where I live) sheriff is a closet white supremacist in an organization where most of the deputies drive jacked up monster trucks with punisher stickers in the windows, in a county that votes 85-to-15 for Democrats. Sheriffs and their deputies are self-selecting exurban white men with tendencies toward AM radio, conspiracy forums, and horse paste.

View on HN

Not sure why this is getting downvoted. I’m sure the sheriffs in many counties are just fine. But even the national and international news covers the AlCo sheriffs abuse (check out the Colbert Report and The Guardian).

While this isn’t directly related to the AlCo sheriffs, you can also look up the “crime reduction” social media scandal from Oakland PD, a law enforcement agency within Alameda County.

He may be right that cops basically can't get fired but he's getting downvoted because he pivots to complaining that have adopted a particular branding he doesn't like. Of course that goes over like a lead balloon on a site where many people's day jobs includes thinking about the difference between specific cases and a general case. Replacing punisher skulls with rainbows and monster trucks with Teslas isn't going to change the fact that the police are capricious, unaccountable and feel enabled to rule with an iron fist.

"Branding he doesn't like" is a whole thing, though. Showing contempt for the norms of society by getting a bunch of obscene tattoos and driving a vehicle that violates every relevant stanza of the vehicle code is not a healthy behavior for individuals and organizations who are granted the exclusive franchise on violence.

>Showing contempt for the norms of society...

Oh please, punisher skulls and lifted trucks are the white dude equivalent of pumpkin spice "outside the betlway".

It's no surprise that a "nice suburb" is serviced by garbage collectors and landscapers from the hood. Why is it a surprise that they have to hire hicks to be their jackboot?

The Punisher is not a good mindset for cops to follow. It's vigilantism of the worst kind.

He works as a comic book character, a character with deep flaws. But the Punisher is not a figure to look up to at all.

I'd argue that it's less an issue of branding, and more an issue of credibility. If you were about to get surgery, and the surgeon came in and started talking about how the lastest InfoWars really nailed it, and how the US government was being manipulated by space lizards and CERN was just about to open a black hole, would you let him take you under the knife?

If these police are flagrantly ignoring the law, and are getting their news media from conspiracy theorists, they lose the credibility to be trusted in making rational decisions. You don't put people who aren't critical thinkers in positions of extreme power and responsibility.

If they were covered in Nazi tattoos, would you be saying the same thing? Tattoos don't make you into a bad person; bad people get bad tattoos, like ones glorifying ruthless comic book vigilantes specifically designed to appeal to the 70s law-and-order Dirty Harry audience.

>Sheriffs and their deputies are self-selecting exurban white men with tendencies toward AM radio, conspiracy forums, and horse paste.

He was doing great until the last sentence when he went stereotyping.

As someone who knows a lot of police officers, it just sounds like the poster also knows a lot of police officers.

Maybe, but it's a simple minded dig to a much better point. He diluted his own post by placing the police and about 50% of the population into a reductive stereotype. Not the best way to be persuasive.

Also, Villanueva, the LA sheriff is not only a Democrat, he was assisted by the Democratic Party in getting elected. Not only was the OP stereotyping but he was trying to shift blame to another party. Maybe Democrats in CA should start looking into their own party for the cause of these problems rather than giving them a free pass and shifting blame.

FWIW, I think the justice system in CA is hopelessly corrupt and brutal and has been for decades. That's a pretty serious problem Californians don't seem to want to address. Maybe corrupt, brutal justice systems suit the bosses of both parties just fine and the voters just don't want to admit their tribe is just as bad in this regard as the other tribe.

Oh well, divide and conquer strikes again. Enjoy your free nightstick massage and lead infusions.

https://laist.com/news/criminal-justice/la-democrats-helped-...

HEY! AM radio is not a monolith in the Bay Area. KNBR is rad.

If the county votes 85-15 Democrat, and the sheriff is elected, then... why does that area elect a sheriff like the one you're describing?

Because they lie and uninformed voters believe them. Villanueva in LA county painted himself as some progressive champion against all this and once he got voted in he took off the costume and now stuff like this happens:

"Sheriff Alex Villanueva met with the Inspector General Tuesday to discuss deputy gangs in the department but the meeting abruptly ended when the sheriff's lawyer advised him not to take an oath to tell the truth"

https://twitter.com/katecagle/status/1437242733068898308?s=2...

Because the sheriff runs unopposed because only credentialed LEOs can run for sheriff in CA. And then the sheriffs have a habit of resigning in office and appointing an heir (i.e. incumbent). Our upcoming election in 2022 is the first competitive election in about 50 years.

And if you look at the vote totals, most people under vote on the sheriffs office (i.e. people just leave it blank or write in dumb stuff like “deez nutz.”)

And up here in Washington... if you are a LEO and run against your sheriff, you likely find yourself fired and suing for unfair dismissal.

See also - Rio Arriba County, NM, where the newspapers beg the undersheriff not to run[1] even though the sheriff has a host[2] of— issues.

[1]http://www.riograndesun.com/opinion/editorials/sheriffs-resi...

[2]https://apnews.com/article/government-and-politics-d02c66d14...

So? In a county that votes 85% Democrat, there are no credentialed LEOs who are Democrats who want to run for sheriff? If not, why not?

I don’t want to get in to conspiracy theories. But imagine you’re a good cop with a nice life and a happy family. Do you put it all on the line to run against an entrenched incumbent? What kinds of dirty “tricks” might you be worried about?

Good cops don’t stay cops. They’re usually either pushed out or die under unusual circumstances.

I know a very good man that was a cop. I think he could only stand about 5 years of it.

Because if you run against literally your own boss in the primary election and lose, then your life will be sad. It's a bad system that requires reform at the state level.

Because it’s like running against Putin in an election or the leader of MS13

Democrats demand the same results of their cops as Republicans do, they just can't stomach the process (which is a common cop critique of liberals.)

Relying on cops to fix a broken society is as bad as relying on teachers to fix a broken society. You end up with a bunch of sadists as cops, and a bunch of martyrs as teachers.

You actually have to change something, you can't just let the status quo continue and expect a different result.

But Dems don't demand the same results of cops as Republicans. There simply isn't any room for "both sides" logic in this instance. Only one side even entertains demilitarizing police forces, curtailing Civil Forefeiture, dismantling police immunity, legalizing recreational drugs and redirecting police funds to social services so that police don't have to get involved in the first place.

There is a reason that Punisher stickers, and Thin Blue Line imagery exist in law enforcement and Republican communities.

Get your Democratic majority to put forth a clean bill ending Civil Forefeiture and it'll pass easily. Other than one highway patrolman I know, nobody I know of supports that evil law.

Such as this civil forfeiture reform that passed unanimously in 2016?

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm...

Sometimes it feels like people online are arguing about some imaginary California.

"Democrats" is a broad term. That's possibly true of "centrist" / "moderate" DINOs, but if you look at, say, folks who set up the CHOP in Seattle (who might not proudly call themselves Democrats, but are far more likely to vote for a Democrat than a Republican), they very clearly did not want the cops to so much as investigate an actual murder.

I think most people realize that if they call for less policing, they're calling for less policing, and they really do mean what they're asking for.

(To be clear, I'm speaking about my own beliefs here: I think there should be less policing, and I fully realize that means less investigation of murders. You cannot give up essential liberty for temporary security.)

That's really unfortunate. They sound like they might be the sort that make individual judgments based on group stereotypes.

Sounds like the person who posted that story would fit right in with them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com