Police-issued "courtesy cards" help friends and family out of minor infractions

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/v7gxa4/pba-card-police-courtesy-cards

by danso • 6 years ago

608 434 6 years ago

$Preview of Police-issued "courtesy cards" help friends and family out of minor infractions$ vice.com

taneq2• 6 years ago

I couldn't believe it when I found out that these are a real, actual thing. I don't see how anyone in the US can cast stones at any other nation for corrupt police accepting bribes when you can largely get carte blanche just for being 'in the club' there.

wjp3• 6 years ago

While I think this practice is bad and should end, it's not the same. Not everyone has these cards, whereas anyone can bribe.

d3ntb3ev1l• 6 years ago

If Cops accept cards through an organized and supported system, seems to indicate they would take bribes just as easily.

floss_silicate• 6 years ago

So this is... actually worse?

zen_of_prog• 6 years ago

Not anyone, only those who have money or connections

dragontamer2• 6 years ago

Anyone can buy a FOP decal though, and as far as I'm concerned, an FOP Decal accomplishes the same thing in practice.

I mean, its not the same as bribery. But its the kind of thing that creates the mindset of people like Rittenhouse (Kenosha Shooter).

Showing off a "pro-police" political affiliation (be it a FOP sticker or a PBA card) makes the cops go easy on you for minor infractions.

The problem happens when people who are "pro-police" start showing up at protests, staying past a 8pm curfew, and then shoots three people in self-defense (allegedly).

On the one hand: the Sheriff of Kenosha refused to deputize these people and had the foresight to see what issues the behavior would cause. On the other hand: there's a low-level expectation "friends with benefits" with Police culture. If you're a friend of the police, the police reciprocate that friendship back to you. And one can argue that things are unfair in that regards. (Ex: failure to enforce the curfew on Rittenhouse)

----------

With that being said: I've been to countries with explicit bribery. The American way is better. Period. There's no comparison between this behavior and bribery.

But there seems to be an unfairness even in the American way, which is discussed in the core article and exemplified in Kenosha (and IMO: the Kenosha shooter is just the highest-profile example of this debate).

VBprogrammer• 6 years ago

I'm not sure that is in the "better" column. At least anyone with access to some cash can pass a bribe. Here we are making it a more exclusive to those who hang in the right circles. That to me is more corrupt.

Even the signal it is sending stinks. The law should apply even to other cops (on and off duty but that is another story) equally as any other citizen. If just being friends with a cop gets you some special entitlement then what does being a cop mean, near total immunity?

Ericson2314• 6 years ago

wut

bbotond• 6 years ago

So in a way, it's less democratic than bribing :)

efdee• 6 years ago

It's not the same. It's much, much worse. This is sanctioned, happy-few bribery.

rsynnott4• 6 years ago

That only makes it worse, surely?

kelnos9• 6 years ago

Anyone can bribe... if they have the money to do so. Which certainly puts many groups at a disadvantage.

Regardless, the police officer doesn't benefit directly from being shown a "courtesy card", so it's not like a cop is going to pull someone over just for the hope of getting shown one of these cards. But in countries where police bribery is prevalent, police will often stop people who are doing nothing wrong, simply because they want a bribe.

So I agree that these two practices aren't the same, but not for the reason you state. Both practices are awful and disadvantage people who are unable to participate (don't have police friends, can't afford a bribe), but the "courtesy card" garbage at least doesn't create a police-citizen extortion situation.

koolba4• 6 years ago

There’s a huge difference between signaling a prior relationship with law enforcement by presenting a PBA card and outright bribing the responding officer.

afandian• 6 years ago

They are different, but both forms of corruption.

AlexandrB2• 6 years ago

What's the difference besides how the special permission to break the law is obtained? It's still corruption. The article shows you can buy these cards on eBay for <$100.

bananaface3• 6 years ago

I'd prefer outright bribes, at least then you have to shell out for it

gruez2• 6 years ago

Yeah it's the difference between paying $10/month for Netflix vs buying movies a la carte

mNovak3• 6 years ago

I think the argument concerns how commonplace bribery is.

This exists, but is relatively small in scope. And no, I don't agree with the "universal bribery is democratic" argument, because the end goal is to arrive at 0 bribery.

thinkharderdev4• 6 years ago

I think the counter argument would be that the issue with police bribery is not so much that some people are able to get out of minor citations (it's not like these cards will get you out of murder charge or anything) but rather the issue of corrupt police shaking people down for bribes.

Kednicma• 6 years ago

The equivalent in our industry is when somebody gets locked out of a Google/Apple/etc. multi-service account, has no backup or rescue access, but is put in touch with a friend of a friend who happens to work at the vendor. It's systemic favoritism.

AlexandrB2• 6 years ago

I wish people would keep these kinds of situations in mind when discussing whether or not a certain industry is a "meritocracy".

refurb3• 6 years ago

The issue people have with “meritocracy” is because they can only think in black and white, no grays.

Society is made up of humans and humans do unfair things. That doesn’t mean that tech companies aren’t generally meritocracies.

aaron695• 6 years ago

I have no idea what you are saying?

Having friends in an industry is hard work, so it a meritocracy, it is well earned to have made contacts that will help you.

In this article it's perhaps family, but a family that supports their childrens career in a blue collar job like policing, in a meritocracy, also deserve the reward.

In policing perhaps it's illegal or should be illegal. But it's still a meritocracy.

Minor49er2• 6 years ago

I don't think this is systemic at all. If companies found out that this was going on in their organizations, most of them would shut the practice down pretty quickly and almost certainly fire anyone involved. Otherwise, those companies could face some pretty heavy lawsuits and fines.

jmull• 6 years ago

Systemic doesn’t necessarily mean official.

But semantics aside, I think this often works without violating company policies. It’s more about having a connection to get the attention of someone who has authority to override or initiate a friendly appeal of some prior judgement call.

mattlondon2• 6 years ago

This is not the same.

Knowing someone at Google/Apple who can help you out with a totally legal tech support issue is nothing at all like police corruption.

angry_octet• 6 years ago

It isn't corruption, but an example of the systematic advangages some of have because we have connections. People we know from school, university, work, sports clubs, the goddamn Masons. The Chinese call it guānxi and accept it as the way of things. I think it sucks.

throwaway0a5e3• 6 years ago

The fundamental issue here is that being a normal person puts you on the wrong side of the law and/or the punishments for being on the wrong side of the law are too severe.

TempLogsForOne• 6 years ago

That is just a symptom of the problem as the tyrannical administrative bureaucratic police state expands at exponential rates, to cheers and demands for ever more control by mommy and daddy government.

But to your point, you are correct, the only people left on the wrong side of the law are law abiding productive people who do not have personal connections to law enforcement. Ever other group gets treated with a light touch and has excuses made for them and criminals are now getting off the hook left and right, while the anarcho-tyrannical administrative state increases it's abuses of regular productive and peaceful people.

It's either by design, out of desperation, or due to incompetence; but it will not end well for any of us, regardless.

throwaway0a5e3• 6 years ago

I find it unsurprising but disheartening that this was flagged.

The entire administrative bureaucracy is in on this racket and it's unfair to pick in the police alone for it. In my state it's not just the police that peddle influence like this. Many state agencies have little identifiers that range from IDs to bumper stickers that they give to their employees with the unspoken purpose of signaling "don't screw me, I work for your team". The most coveted are the court system ones because no matter what agency is trying to screw you none of them want to piss off people who work for the courts. My state also has all sorts of ways to wave fines and whatnot for economic hardship reasons (which I fully support). This creates effectively three classes of people, those who are part of the in-group and treated decently by government. Those who have money and are preyed upon by government. And those who don't have money and are ignored by government unless they are committing serious (i.e. violent) crime because the government gains nothing by cracking down on them. Why can't the government just treat everyone like the former or the latter or, even better, repeal all the stupid laws that have wildly low compliance rates?

kop316• 6 years ago

I've also noticed in a lot of states that cars have the "fraternal order of police" sticker, and it is affixed right on their licence plate.

I suspect its for a similar reason, that either if you get your plate's picture taken or local police can see that right away.

nickthegreek2• 6 years ago

yep, its a signal to officers that you went out of your way to donate extra money to the police force so that they are more forgiving as they approach your car or just don't pull you over to begin with.

eplanit• 6 years ago

I think that today a Trump 2020 bumper sticker would have the same effect.

Jaruzel• 6 years ago

to donate extra money to the police force so that they are more forgiving

So a bribe then. Wow.

As citizens of the country we live in, we should all be subject to the same laws and restrictions. Anything less than that is a form of corruption and undermines the whole concept of democracy and a fair society.

joezydeco• 6 years ago

In Illinois, land of the drivers license / license plate cash grab, you can order a custom plate that "shows your support" for the police.

https://www.cyberdriveillinois.com/departments/vehicles/lice...

Stack that up with a bunch of bumper stickers and, if you're brave, hang a checkered headband on your rearview mirror and you'll have a cop thinking you're a cousin of someone on his squad. (Just make sure you're white)

helsinkiandrew4• 6 years ago

he frequently receives PBA cards as a thank-you for extending cops small business favors and deals

This is corruption. I've never understood how things like this can happen in the US - why is this tolerated?

If this happened in the UK I'm fairly sure it would be raised in the press, then parliament and then the Home Secretary (in charge of policing) would be forced to make a statement and likely do something about it.

MattGaiser2• 6 years ago

1.Plenty of Americans view enforcing traffic laws are nothing more than "a greedy gubbermint cash grab." For those participating, they view it as using corruption to avoid corruption.

2. You can't easily do something about it other than taking away police discretion. Unlike with a traditional bribe, where something is exchanged for something, you can't demonstrate that the person got off for the card compared to the officer just deciding to give them a break.

bananaface3• 6 years ago

Can't you just ban the cards?

helsinkiandrew4• 6 years ago

A different/related point - aren't (always on) body cameras taking away police discretion anyway?

raisedbyninjas• 6 years ago

Plenty of Americans that don't run in these corruption circles view traffic laws and other intermittently enforced laws as a tool to hassle "undesirables".

pnutjam3• 6 years ago

I've always said traffic laws mostly encourage a disregard for the law. I think they should set things like speed limits high enough that there is no reason to break them. They are LIMITS, not normal speed. Maybe post a recommended speed too.

If someone breaks the speed limit it should be 30 day license suspension and impounding their vehicle.

krapp• 6 years ago

I've never understood how things like this can happen in the US - why is this tolerated?

Police unions and a strong pro-police "thin blue line" culture.

jopsen5• 6 years ago

We have unions in other countries too, they don't endorse or organize corruption/nepotism/bribery, or the appearance of such.

abawany• 6 years ago

To the point that an aberration of the US flag is considered the preferred symbol of display for some: https://www.npr.org/local/305/2019/11/04/776060800/barring-o... .

bediger40002• 6 years ago

This is corruption. I've never understood how things like this can happen in the US - why is this tolerated?

Because "police" in the USA can mean a lot of things, from county Sheriff, to city police to state police to FBI or one of the other 2 dozen armed federal agencies. It's a patchwork. There's no central authority to enforce some kind of standard of behavior.

WorldMaker2• 6 years ago

Yet there is a central authority involved in this problem: the Fraternal Order of Police. It is that Fraternity that accepted, and made common, these "courtesy cards" as a way of business. The corruptive rot clearly has centralizing forces. The FOP and the police unions have the ability to combat them centrally and presumably enforce a higher standard of behavior, if they wanted to, just as they had a hand in creating the corruptions in the first place. If they wanted to fight it (they probably don't).

aaomidi• 6 years ago

Keep in mind this happens most other places in the world too. The police force is generally a corrupt force. It's just not as obvious and not spoken about as much.

Also keep in mind police force generally targets minorities more. So if your country doesn't have an obvious minority population that has systemically been kept behind, you're not going to see as much police corruption. But it's there.

As a brown person, my worst experiences with cops was in UK and Germany. When I tell people this they're quick to dismiss it by "This shit doesn't happen here"

acituan5• 6 years ago

So if your country doesn't have an obvious minority population that has systemically been kept behind, you're not going to see as much police corruption.

I don't buy this. There are plenty of ethnically homogeneous countries that also has rampant police corruption (e.g. in Eastern Europe), and there are tons of other parameters that affect police corruption overall. We can't single out presence of minorities as a factor.

markdown2• 6 years ago

Keep in mind this happens most other places in the world too.

Citation needed.

majormajor• 6 years ago

The US takes localism to extremes in order to preserve historic fiefdoms and injustices.

The stated desire is to prevent government abuse of powers by keeping the governments small and limiting the powers of the larger ones, but if you look at actions rather than words, it's less about restricting government and more about preserving existing power structures.

Reconstruction is one of the most egregious examples.

rjkennedy98• 6 years ago

Yeah because our federal government is some grand example of honesty and good governance.

ArkVark• 6 years ago

I would argue that whatever the USA is doing is working.

The USA has substantially lower taxes and higher salaries, including for the poorest, than the rest of the Western world.

The USA policeforce seems focused on policing, whereas Police Forces in countries like the UK spend time monitoring online behavior whilst ignoring child grooming gangs.

Its also interesting that in the original article, the examples listed are mundane traffic offenses, and the only serious abuse is entirely fictional - from the Sorpranos.

pravus• 6 years ago

The people involved are getting a huge benefit and there is no reason to report it. Others who don't receive the benefit either don't know about it or are shouted down.

There is a culture in the US that the police are pristine warriors of justice and any accusations of wrong-doing are denied and ignored. There are also many laws that specifically protect LEO and government officials in general because there is a natural ethos that everyone working for The Good is always Good and whatever Bad they did must have been in the duty and service to The Good. Immunity is easy to achieve when the entire legal system wants you to be immune as a class and we are currently having a debate about qualified immunity regarding police in the US.

In my view it is the entire system that is corrupt. A fish rots from its head as they say.

s1artibartfast7• 6 years ago

I think the bigger problem is that the general population does not want the law enforced.

There is also a sentiment that there are so many laws on the books that there is nothing wrong with breaking them or LEO letting people off the hook.

If the average person is good and still commits "3 felonies a day", then it is easy to believe that LEO is giving people a reprieve from systemic injustice, opposed to carrying out injustice.

Nobody shames an individual who get out of a speeding ticket with a warning, when the individual was randomly selected from 10,000 other speeders the same road that day.

throwaway8943452• 6 years ago

I think this is mostly right, but I don't think there are many arguing that police are universally good or perfect as much as (1) they have a hard job and (2) we should be more focused on violent offenders than police corruption.

I'm certainly not advocating for these arguments, but I believe it's important to accurately understand that which you fight against.

riffic2• 6 years ago

why is this tolerated?

Cynically, the answer is "what are you going to do about it, punk?"

Spivak5• 6 years ago

Optimistically, this kind of "friendly-corruption" benefits everyone who participates.

rsynnott4• 6 years ago

then the Home Secretary (in charge of policing) would be forced to make a statement and likely do something about it.

I mean, I would think they'd be forced to resign, in practice.

mcguire2• 6 years ago

The state of policing in the UK took a considerable amount of work.

https://theconversation.com/northern-irelands-police-transfo...

DoofusOfDeath• 6 years ago

This is corruption. I've never understood how things like this can happen in the US - why is this tolerated?

I think it shows that a sizable portion of the citizenry considers this acceptable. I.e., they're enamored with the idea of getting preferential treatment for themselves or their friends, with little regard for the implications. It makes me figuratively (and a bit literally) want to vomit.

kbenson3• 6 years ago

I think it shows that a sizable portion of the citizenry considers this acceptable.

That only makes sense if you assume a sizable portion of the citizenry knows about it.

I think people assume that cops are imperfect and let people off if they know them, or feel like it (the average hetero male cop probably lets disproportionately more pretty girls off with a warning), but that as a judgement call it's hard to alter (and there are good reasons to allow judgement calls). That it's often formalized and systematized into cards that are given out is another thing entirely, and I think you need to prove the average person knows it's happening before you can use it as evidence as to how average people feel.

mjw1007• 6 years ago

Well, the Home Secretary would probably be forced to announce an inquiry, which might report over a decade later, long after said Home Secretary's political career was over.

Consider for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undercover_Policing_Inquiry

« In 2012 Theresa May had commissioned Mark Ellison QC to review allegations of corruption » « The Undercover Policing Inquiry or Pitchford Inquiry … is due to report back in 2023 »

helsinkiandrew4• 6 years ago

Nonsense. That’s investigating thousands of investigations that took place over 40 years, with many questions and issues.

Whether ‘get out of jail free’ cards are acceptable is a yes/no question.

wolco2• 6 years ago

Yet no one says anything about turning London into a police state. Are the press still on top of this story?

Symbiote2• 6 years ago

I think you need to be clearer on what you mean by "police state" before anyone can answer that.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/police

s1artibartfast7• 6 years ago

It happens because the general public, as well as LEO, don't believe that many of the laws on the book should be enforced.

As far as I am aware, nobody thinks LEO is letting murders go as a favor. For example, 90% of Americans ignore posted speed limits, as do LEO. When someone gets a speeding ticket, it seems bad luck and unfair. This makes it seem more acceptable for LEO to let someone off the hook.

notJim2• 6 years ago

In the US, the police are essentially an occupying force with their own agenda that they pursue. At times it aligns with the agenda of broader society, but at times not. Because the police know not to mess with the "wrong" people, and because they're generally very well regarded by society, the police unions have considerable power, such that elected officials are often terrified to reign them in. A good example of this is NYC where hundreds of cops turned their backs on the mayor and basically accused him of stoking violence against the police after he was mildly critical of them. This was a huge news story[1], and the mayor has refrained from criticism since then.

1: https://time.com/3644168/new-york-police-de-blasio-wenjian-l...

ALittleLight2• 6 years ago

I think it's corruption too, but I have to roll my eyes at "If this happened in the UK..."

The police, and city councils, in the UK have tacitly permitted, for decades, systematic child rape as seen in the Rotterham grooming scandal [1] and numerous others throughout the country. How can you suggest that cops wouldn't look the other way for minor infractions when there are countless examples of them ignoring obscene and severe crimes of the worst sort against the most vulnerable?

I don't want this to come off as a "my country is better than yours" but at the same time, I don't think using the UK police as an example of anything to aspire to is a good idea.

1 -https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_explo...

crispyporkbites• 6 years ago

That’s absolute bollocks. The uk police has oversight from the IOPC and you can read all about the ongoing conduct investigation for that cherry picked example here https://policeconduct.gov.uk/news/independent-investigation-...

jeffbee• 6 years ago

How can a city that small be that fucked up?

Thorentis• 6 years ago

"The failure to address the abuse was attributed to ... fear that the perpetrators' ethnicity would trigger allegations of racism and damage community relations"

Defund the police for being too worried about racism to do their job. Wait ... what?

helsinkiandrew4• 6 years ago

Are you saying these acts were encouraged by police unions and widely supported by police and their families nationwide and that it was widely reported about, known about and continued to take place?

When it was widely reported in the press, the public were disgusted and the government took action.

I’m not saying that the UK police are perfect, or the UK is better than the US. Just that this kind of systematic, widespread behaviour that many/most people find unacceptable would be stopped.

freeopinion2• 6 years ago

Your outrage reminds me of the "bribery scandal" of the 2002 Winter Olympics. Somebody "exposed" an extensive system of bribes made to officials who would vote on the host city for the Olympics. Every night more allegations of the scandal were reported with proper shock and outrage.

It was a bit of a head scratcher for me. I remember, for example, when it was uncovered that one official had been gifted a very expensive custom-made shotgun. The news anchor was very solemn in reporting this outrageous misdeed. Rewind 9 or 11 months earlier and the exact same anchor was cheerfully reporting a public ceremony in which a visiting Olympic dignitary was presented with a gift from the organizing committee formed to win the bid. It was a happy day filled with optimism and hope for what might soon be. Lots of flash bulbs. That publicly-presented token of good will was the custom-made shotgun.

secabeen2• 6 years ago

The issue there is that the custom-made shotgun should be considered a gift to the Olympic organization as an organization, not to the official personally. The official could even display the shotgun in their office. Then, when they left that office, the shotgun stays behind, and doesn't become part of their personal collection.

gnopgnip• 6 years ago

"It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer"

Letting some people get away with speeding and other minor crimes isn't seen as an corruption, or something that needs to be stopped. It is also still up to the police to make the decision either way, they can still give you a ticket, flashing a PBA card could make some situations worse.

Ichthypresbyter• 6 years ago

The closest thing to it in the UK is that traffic police would put "Black Rat" stickers on their personal cars. Of course, it didn't take very long for members of the public to find out what the stickers meant and for people who had nothing to do with the police to start making and selling them- by all accounts they don't really work any more, and haven't for years.

lipstone• 6 years ago

The level of police corruption is much, much higher in many other countries. Why are you singling the US out?

spacedcowboy• 6 years ago

What the actual fuck ?

From an outside-the-US perspective, the stack of “Things I’d never believe about the USA, please, Alex” is just getting higher and higher.

How is it legal to have preferential treatment, no matter under what circumstances, for ‘friends of the police’? Is Lady Liberty not famously blind while balancing the scales of justice ? Does the maxim “justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done” somehow not apply in the USA ?

Over the last few years, it seems to me the rock that used to be the USA has been overturned, and all the slimy creepy little nasties are being exposed to the harsh light of day. What happens in a few months is going to be critical to the soul of your nation. Get it right, I doubt you’ll recover if you don’t.

derwiki2• 6 years ago

I assure you, “friend of the police” cards have been going on for more than a few years. And from what my military friends tell me, handing a cop your military ID tends to work just as well.

geerlingguy• 6 years ago

In some communities other memberships can also hold sway. I remember one person mentioning some sort of scouting membership getting him out of a traffic stop.

non-entity• 6 years ago

And from what my military friends tell me, handing a cop your military ID tends to work just as well.

Not literally handing it over, but I've seen this work a few times growing up.

zb• 6 years ago

A relative started getting pulled over a lot for speeding right after he bought a red car. Solution: he’s an ex-Marine so he bought a USMC number plate surround (not even one of the custom plates that require proof that you’re a veteran!). Problem stops just as quickly as it started.

tialaramex• 6 years ago

Is Lady Liberty not famously blind while balancing the scales of justice ?

No, in two ways

First, that lass with the scales is Justice not Liberty.

Second she doesn't always wear a blindfold, the depictions of her vary considerably in that regard, and there's a good chance there's a depiction of Justice near near you where she can see perfectly well.

And Justice is holding something important in her other hand, which artists (and perhaps other people symbolically) sometimes forget.

Liberty is the one with the book and the torch.

SahAssar3• 6 years ago

You're right, but missing all the points. Or just deciding to not talk about them.

sp3322• 6 years ago

Police could also put certain license plates into a database that means they don't have to pay tolls. https://www.ocregister.com/2009/11/12/special-license-plates...

See also the CHP 11-99 Foundation license plate frame which djmobley posted about in this thread.

BurningFrog2• 6 years ago

I think the legal theory is that for many minor crimes, the individual officer has personal discretion to decide if they give a fine or just a warning.

You don't want every jaywalker dragged into jail "on principle".

It's probably true in most countries that if the cop likes you, you can get away with much more than if they don't. But this brazen selling of "freebies" does seem uniquely american.

markdown2• 6 years ago

You don't want every jaywalker dragged into jail "on principle".

Why not?

CobrastanJorji• 6 years ago

Excellent point. Let's look at how "police discretion" works for what's basically a non-crime like jaywalking. In 2019, the NYPD issued 397 tickets for illegal or unsafe road crossing. 354 (90%) were issued to black or hispanic walkers. Black and hispanics are about 55% of the population.

But the story doesn't end there. The police in NYC are divided into 77 "precincts." Just 3 of those 77 divisions issued 40% of the tickets. Those precincts are predominant black and hispanic areas (Claremont Village, South Bronx, High Bridge). Meanwhile, 37 precincts didn't issue even a single jaywalking ticket all year.

If police officers used their personal discretion in some sort of consistent or even completely random way, it'd be fine, but clearly it is enforced in a terribly uneven way, even consciously or unconsciously.

forgotmysn• 6 years ago

law enforcement is fundamentally broken in the U.S.

kelnos9• 6 years ago

I highly recommend reading Howard Zinn's "People's History of the United States". I assure you that things like this -- and things much much worse -- have been going on in the US since before the US was the US, without much of a break through present times. I dare say that things are actually better now than they used to be[0].

The stuff Americans learn about in primary school about US history, respect for the constitution, blind justice, etc. is a very very "polished" version of what actually happened. It's a shame to hear that even people from outside the US get this whitewashed history.

[0] As a simple example, it was common until the early 20th century for police and state militias to be brought in to break up what are now legally-protected workers' strikes, often with fatal results for workers, where no one was held accountable for those deaths. Police were a tool of the elite, land- and business-owning classes. And to some extent they still are.

satisfaction• 6 years ago

You seem to be suggesting that if the correct candidate is elected in November these problems will be fixed, that couldn't be further from reality. These problems have been here for decades. In fact, if we put forth that the candidate that has been voting on bills and by extension existing laws for the longest period of time is more to blame for the current state of affairs then you have no choice but to conclude that voting for that candidate will not change much.

peterwwillis• 6 years ago

We have tons of preferential treatment in our justice system, it's not really a secret. For example, economic preferential treatment. If you have lots of money, you can get out on bail easily. If you're poor, you may lose your job, maybe your kid (social services), etc, if you can't afford bail. If you get arrested on some minor charge and you have $80 cash in your wallet, you can be released immediately rather than wait overnight for a judge to arraign you in the morning. Did you know foreign nationals can buy residency in U.S.? Not citizenship, but residency; I think it's ~$300,000.

Unlike Lady Justice, cops are not blind at all - they can pick and choose when to enforce the law. I forget what it's called, but the police are literally given the option for some laws to just not enforce the law if they don't want to. If the cop is in a good mood, they can decide to just let it slide. If they're in a bad mood (or they don't like the color of your skin) they might prefer to enforce it.

merricksb• 6 years ago

If curious, see this discussion about the topic from early 2018:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16207890

gwbas1c• 6 years ago

You don't need a physical card.

A friend of mine who used to get into trouble all the time when he was a teenager got away with a ton of stuff. His father was a chief or something, so every local cop just knew who he was.

You don't want to arrest your boss's son.

spideymans2• 6 years ago

Heck, if you're wealthy enough, and get pulled over drunk, tell then you're friends with someone at the department. The cop will make a few phone calls, and boom, you get chauffeured home by the cops for free.

pavon• 6 years ago

Yeah, these cards are basically a way of extending behavior that has always occurred in small departments to a larger force where the police can't possibly know everyone they are "supposed" to give favors to.

qntty• 6 years ago

The first step to being an authoritarian is separating the in-group from the out-group so you can deal out harsh punishment to one and be forgiving to the other.

EGreg• 6 years ago

Hate the game, not the player. This is definitely corruption. BUT, at least, it is supposed to be for minor infractions.

Unlike meter maids, police officers should be given leeway to let people go. It’s the mandatory minimums and fines you should worry about... cops doing revenue generation for the city. And when their department doesn’t get enough from taxes and tickets, police departments across the country turn to civil forfeiture.

Ideally, the officers should act as if everyone has these cards.

https://www.inquirer.com/philly/news/local/20100607_Police_s...

nicoburns• 6 years ago

Ideally, the officers should act as if everyone has these cards.

Totally agree with this. I think part of the reason they are in issue is it reduces the political pressure on this happening if some people can get this treatment anyway.

nip1803• 6 years ago

I find unequal enforcement of the law to be one is it’s worst aspects. There is not only officer discretion, but there is also discretion several places in the judicial system and privilege in being able to hire better legal council. Some neighborhoods are policed more heavily than others. Some groups of people are targeted more heavily than others. Some city police departments enforce state/federal laws unevenly.

There should be one law for everyone, and if two random people with similar criminal histories break the same law in different places we should expect their outcomes and sentencing to be very similar. Right now this is far from the case.

darkarmani2• 6 years ago

I agree, but at the same time the alternative is zero tolerance.

Maybe the big problem is not the discretion, but that it isn't recorded? For example, i think it is complete corruption that LEOs and their families generally get "professional courtesy". I've heard the argument that it is a perk of the job. I disagree, but if you accept that argument, I would say: let the judge and courts handle the forgiveness of the offense and have it recorded in documents. Make it an official procedure and it will not look like corruption.

nip1803• 6 years ago

I agree, but at the same time the alternative is zero tolerance.

I think it’s unfair to use term zero tolerance to describe equal enforcement. Zero tolerance is a specific sentencing pattern which uses harsh punishments for crimes. Equal enforcement is about making sure all groups have the same relationship with the law. If the laws on the books are overly harsh once enforced than we should change those laws.

specialp• 6 years ago

This is real at least in the NY area. NY law gives officers "discretion" in issuing violations (not crimes). That doesn't have a limit. So being friends with a fellow PO is technically not an illegal reason to not issue a violation. I agree that it is not fair. Generally though if you do something like drive 30 over the limit, they aren't going to let you off with a card.

But a non connected person can get pulled over for something minor and get every ticket they can. This snowballs for poor people that then have more fines on top of fines.

mattlondon2• 6 years ago

There used to be something similar in the UK IIRC - the traffic police nicknamed themselves "black rats". If you had a sticker of the black rat mascot/logo on the back of your car then you were either a traffic officer, or someone close to them (wife/husband/etc) and a wink and a nod an you were on your way. I don't think it was a deliberate "get out of jail" move - just more of a "Oh you have a sticker for my unit's mascot on your car!" recognition type thing.

I think it kinda stopped when they started giving away the stickers on "enthusiast" car/motorbike magazines etc

jopsen5• 6 years ago

Lol, I suppose as the cards carries no real legitimacy, it's not illegal to fake them.

That said, being stopped by cop who notices that it's fake probably isn't a good idea :)

0823498723498722• 6 years ago

Are "KMA 367" plate holders still a thing in Los Angeles?

https://www.straightdope.com/21341883/in-los-angeles-why-do-...

jopsen5• 6 years ago

The mere appearance of corruption in police is enough of a problem. Even in minor cases.

Debating whether this is bribery or nepotism is pointless, because the appearance this gives should be plenty to fire officers who hand out such cards.

Conveniently, they supposedly write their name on the cards they hand out :)

kemayo• 6 years ago

I once got pulled over for speeding in the middle of Kansas. The cop who was giving me my ticket told me that they had a program for avoiding having the ticket reported so your insurance rates won't rise. So I went along with it, and mailed the cost of the ticket plus a hundred dollars to that city's police department, care of the "sheriff's benevolent association" (or similar -- it's been a decade, the name is fuzzy to me).

...it remains one of the more blatantly shady-feeling things I remember encountering in the US.

bathtub365• 6 years ago

I'd rather give my money to an insurance company than corrupt cops.

throwaway0a5e3• 6 years ago

I'd pick a lawyer over either. At least he has to make a living delivering results. The other two have their existence perpetuated by law.

rurp3• 6 years ago

I've used a random traffic lawyer a couple times for stupid speed trap tickets. The process was really fast and they got the fine knocked down quite a bit. I'd much rather pay $100 each to a lawyer and the city, than pay the city $250.

The only reason cities and towns abuse speed traps is that it's profitable. If the costs exceed the money they bring in they might shift those resources to real crimes and fix the artificially low speed limits.

cmckn2• 6 years ago

I think this sort of "we'll give you a pass on this one if you just pay the ticket" is a super gross practice.

I recently got a camera citation for not stopping completely behind the line before turning right on red. Fine was $125. If I paid the fine, it would be treated as a parking ticket. If not, it would be a moving violation and points would hit my license, if I lost the case.

I feel like, if a cop thinks I broke the law, they should stand behind that. If $125 convinces the cop that I didn't really break the law, that sounds like corruption to me.

luckylion2• 6 years ago

If you're paying a ticket, you're not paying the cop though, that's not corruption. They're saying "we've got you, but here's an offer because we don't think we can convict you of the big thing, or because you've been doing this for the first time". You can take it and pay your dues, or you can fight. But then they might fight as well.

There's no reason why the state should go to court over every infraction. You hopefully learned a lesson about stopping the car, why should the state spend thousands of dollars on a court case and make you spend a lot as well?

That would be very different if they said "you can get a ticket or you can donate the money to my wife's charity."

bobby_bob• 6 years ago

This was codified in my state's public transport fines. Pay on-the-spot (assuming you have a CC and funds) and it's $75, wait or contest it an it's $223.

It was a system blatantly established to prevent people exercising their right to contest a fine. New government abolished this arrangement as it was blatantly unfair and illogical, and also reduced compliance.

They also removed on-the-spot warnings and fines, having all interactions reported and justified-to and reviewed by a separate governing body before an infringement or warning is issued. Taking a great deal of power away from the transport officers.

These all seem like pretty straightforward measures to avoid corrupt or even just unfair practices.

mNovak3• 6 years ago

In the same category of the "Unhooking fee" a tow truck will charge--you can pick up your car from impound for $200, or you can pay the tow driver $200 on the spot and save the hassle.

Though obviously lesser significance than the same behaviors from your police force.

sokoloff3• 6 years ago

To be honest, it seems like if a tow truck had to be called out to tow you, the tow company has earned something even if they didn’t tow you to impound.

RandomBacon2• 6 years ago

If you get in the vehicle, their power over you grearly diminishes as they can't tow a vehicle with a person in it.

lawnchair_larry• 6 years ago

The racial connection here is quite a stretch and sounds like more race baiting. It has nothing to do with that. Knicks players have them. Yankees have them.

dbg314152• 6 years ago

My neighbor in Austin is a lawyer for the police union. He would hand these cards out to everyone in the cul-de-sac along with some booze for Christmas presents. There's a little "CLEAT" sticker that you can put in your back window too.

I put the sticker in the window of one car but not the other.

In the car without the sticker... I got pulled over in West Texas visiting relatives, and the cop literally had his gun drawn as he came to my window. Alone on a dark and empty road, guy with a gun on you -- probably the scariest moment of my life.

In the car with the sticker, in a similar small town in West Texas (lots of speed traps between Austin and Midland)... as the officer was walking to my car he saw the sticker and his whole body language instantly shifted. He got to my window, "Hope I didn't scare you with the lights, you don't seem like you're from around here. Are you lost? Just trying to be neighborly."

I was going 20-ish miles over the speed limit both times.

I looked into getting another sticker and it literally only cost me $25. Significantly better treatment from police doesn't cost very much. Anyway, yup corrupt as fuck... but as long as these exist, for a simple $25 donation, might as well have a CLEAT sticker in your window.

Also, what really bugs me... Police in Texas are allowed to unionize, but Teachers are not. Oof. Been here almost 20 years now, I love a lot of things about Texas, but some of the politics still suck.

PS: Also I keep a Book of the Mormon in my glove compartment, that way if I ever do get pulled over I just casually grab the book when looking for insurance papers. For some reason seems like a lot of cops in Texas are Mormons...

0823498723498722• 6 years ago

Lund, "Bible on the Dash": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5S00y75ebq8

dbg314152• 6 years ago

Ha, spot on.

When you find a flaw, do you fix the system or game the system?

0xcafecafe• 6 years ago

Wow. I wonder if there is an equivalent of this sticker for other states.

asdff6• 6 years ago

Fraternal order police chapters put one out in every state.

smaslennikov• 6 years ago

Pretty confused why this post got flagged, but I did put together a (strong) personal opinion a while back[^0] that touches on these topics. I didn't publish it because a friend gave me a counter opinion I couldn't find a time to respond to, but I suppose it might as well be public now.

[^0]: https://smaslennikov.com/posts/enforcement/

cvhashim• 6 years ago

Why is Vice always flagged on HN?

me_me_me• 6 years ago

So we are now using monopoly rules to run a country?

A literal get-out-of-jail-free card!

dafoex3• 6 years ago

There's literally a monopoly "go" tile on it. Contrast this with the UK where the coppers like to get "go to jail" t shirts.

excalibur• 6 years ago

The cards embody everything wrong with modern policing.

That's a pretty broad claim. The cards aren't even big enough to LIST everything wrong with modern policing.

dafoex3• 6 years ago

Its a pretty broad claim because a lot of countries have a different idea to america on what modern policing means.

thrwn_frthr_awy• 6 years ago

The cards represent corruption, self-interest, and selective enforcement of the law. I think a lot of problems would be solved or help accountable for if those issues were resolved.

kelnos9• 6 years ago

I think it's a pretty reasonable claim. The cards illustrate the idea that the law is applied unequally, and at the whim of the police officer... which I believe is the root of much of the problems with US policing.

notJim2• 6 years ago

be an expression of or give a tangible or visible form to (an idea, quality, or feeling)

The cards "are an expression of" everything wrong with modern policing. Not sure if you are just being pedantic, but this seems to fit.

JoeAltmaier2• 6 years ago

Seems sketchy. But even the TSA has a 'safe list' of folks who can skip the line - is this morally different? Law enforcement identifies folks who are not habitual offenders, who support law enforcement and who if they abuse the privilege will hear about it from a cop/friend, and give them a card. Not sounding like such a terrible thing to me. Remember, nobody is getting away with murder here.

<edit: elaborate>

djmobley• 6 years ago

Sounds like the CHP 11-99 Foundation license plate frame, which could (allegedly) get you out of speeding tickets [0]

[0] https://priceonomics.com/can-you-buy-a-license-to-speed/

rsynnott4• 6 years ago

This can't _possibly_ be legal, surely? Wtf.

moogly• 6 years ago

Only (or is it 'not even'?) the Police police the Police.

theptip• 6 years ago

Presumably this sort of thing will become harder to maintain as bodycams become more prevalent.

It seems plausible that anti-corruption NGOs could request the bodycam footage (anonymized, I suppose) under public records disclosure laws. (e.g. see https://www.rcfp.org/bodycam-video-access/, though I'd be really interested in what others think about the likely legal interpretations of disclosure requirements.)

Yet another reason to push for more bodycams, and auditability/disclosure of that footage; sunlight is often the best disinfectant.

sbilstein• 6 years ago

Given that we have lots of body cam footage of police brutality now yet haven’t significantly moved the needle on reducing incidences, I’m not hopeful that will make a difference.

Maybe incentives for snitching on fellow police would work better?

djaque• 6 years ago

The problem right now is that camera footage is handled by the police departments. Any oversight requires the police to operate in good faith. Thinking back to how many news reports I've seen where the footage was "lost" or "the cameras were not switched on" I don't have any trust in that type of system.

We really need third party monitoring.

BitwiseFool• 6 years ago

Plus, think of the thousands of hours of footage that is regularly collected. Without some incident or reason to inspect the video, most of the incidents would go undetected.

woodruffw2• 6 years ago

For the curious: a more regional[1] form of this petty corruption in the NYC area is placard abuse[2]. It's pretty common to see cars with these parked in front of hydrants, in bike lanes, etc, being completely ignored by the police.

[1]: As far as I know, being a lifelong New Yorker.

[2] https://twitter.com/placardabuse

Xavdidtheshadow• 6 years ago

The Houston area PD has an organization called the "100 Club" [0] where you can donate to get a nice sticker. Each year has a different color, so it's easy to show how long you've been a member. [1]

Officially they're just to support the LEO orgs, but there's also anecdata in my friend group that having one (or more) makes you more likely to get out of most things with just a warning.

[0] https://the100club.org/about/#what [1]: https://twitter.com/sighborgs/status/1246113527158497282

woodruffw2• 6 years ago

Apropos of nothing: apart from being similar to the placard racket, I wonder how many people who donate to this organization realize that their dollars are being used to buy MRAPs[1], not pay for the educations of the children of dead cops.

[1] https://the100club.org/newsroom/

asdff6• 6 years ago

There must be something like that in LA as well, as a surprising number of people are driving on the road and parking on the street with no plates at all. Sometimes nice cars, usually with the drug dealer tint level on the windows (slightly darker than celebrity tinted windows).

renewiltord• 6 years ago

Hahaha, I love it. They literally formalized the old boys' network.

aazaa• 6 years ago

The recent focus on racial bias in policing has had a negative outcome: to distract attention from the fact that the law is being applied unevenly across the US.

Racial bias in police encounters is a symptom, not the disease.

86J8oyZv• 6 years ago

This is true, but the racial bias is easier to get people to rally behind. And it's gotten people talking more about the non-racial injustices in our justice system, too.

stefan_3• 6 years ago

The big problem in the US is the lack of automated speed enforcement. When you have officers doing traffic enforcement it inevitably turns into a corrupt shit show, and if you're black, you might not even live through it.

Although its now 2020, where every 300 gram toy drone will automatically refuse to fly anywhere near an airport. It took 0 drones taking down 0 airplanes to do that. Modern cars can trivially enforce the speed limit, but we have ten thousands of deaths and counting every year and it's not happening.

donmcronald• 6 years ago

A 100% guarantee of getting caught would significantly reduce the number of people speeding. That eliminates something that functions like a regressive tax, so it's never going to happen.

nitrogen4• 6 years ago

Modern cars can trivially enforce the speed limit

Not sure about everywhere, but speed limits are first glance limits in at least some places, where other evidence can prove that a speed above the limit was not "speeding". Speed limits don't know what traffic is doing, they don't know road conditions, they don't know if you have an emergency. They're just a number set by ideally an engineer, or less ideally a party with conflicting interests (revenue).

I had to drive someone to an emergency room once. There wasn't time or money for an ambulance. If my car was automatically enforcing speed limits, they might have died.

Moreover there are far, far, far fewer no-fly zones than speed limit zones. A no-fly zone is a fairly simple polygon -- are you inside or outside. Every street has its own speed limit, which can vary from 5mph to 80mph in the US, and traffic on some freeways is consistently higher than 80. Some highways have dynamic speed limits, e.g. 65 at night and 55 during rush hour. School zones and pedestrian crossings have limits based on whether someone has switched on a light, or times of day, or even just the presence of children.

So no, you cannot have, and do not want, automated in-vehicle enforcement of speed limits.

stefan_3• 6 years ago

No, the fact that US people can't call an ambulance for risk of bankruptcy is not a good reason to allow cars to accelerate to 120 mph in cities.

That's the point here: you can add cities as simple convex polys and you are already 80% of the way there. Drones don't need to listen to air traffic either.

SahAssar3• 6 years ago

Wouldn't the emergency issue be solved by having a "emergency mode" where after that was activated you'd have to justify it within say 24h or so?

Also the "no simple polygon" is more an issue of time, right? If I enter a 40mph zone and do 60+mph for a sustained 1min perhaps it should lower my max speed by 4mph per min or similar.

I don't think these are simple problems, but I also think they are far from impossible and if it both makes traffic safer and removes a human corruption element it might be worth it.

holbrad• 6 years ago

Perhaps it's just my friend groups and family but most people I know would be vehemently against this. (UK)

Most people speed (including myself), it's just not a big deal. I mean sure people die, it happens, but that's almost exclusively from distraction.

The police waste far too much time on the issue, but it makes money so they do it. Fully automated enforcement around schools ? Sure. On a 4-lane motorway ? No (Germany has it right)

anm896• 6 years ago

The simplest way to fix a huge amount of problems that exist in the USA would be to start holding the police accountable for their actions.

This is police corruption, an especially harmful category of corruption that undermindes our entire legal system. It should be 5 years minimum in federal prison. Police should recieve drastically stronger charges and sentences when they violate the law, not the other way around. If someone above was found to have known about it and didn't report it should be 2x.

You show me a problem in modern america (maybe except healthcare) and I bet I could argue this one policy would fix it in one roundabout way or another.

It won't happen for a bunch of structural reasons unless a major party took it up as a major part of their platform but it would work.

Come to think of it, this is one of the very few things one of the major parties could do to get me to vote for them.

secabeen2• 6 years ago

And to be clear, to to common refrain "well, if cops were going to be held responsible for their actions, they wouldn't put their lives at risk, they've be extra conservative!", my answer to you is: "fine, we don't want those people to be cops anyways."

kaesar14• 6 years ago

And if it really is that much more dangerous and risky to be a cop because of this, pay them more! People put their health on the line to be GARBAGEMEN for cryin' out loud! They do it because the pay is good, and the benefits are solid. Make the cops earn the inordinate salaries they pull home.

anm896• 6 years ago

Strong agree, take that extra payroll and give it back to the cops willing to stick around and make it a respectable job again.

dsr_• 6 years ago

Require malpractice insurance for police; require that they pay it themselves, not as part of a union or from their civilian employer. Require insurance companies to set prices solely by service record of the individual and of the unit and of the city/county/state employer.

Commit a felony, lose your insurance coverage, be unemployable. Happens to doctors; why shouldn't it happen to police?

Go to work for a misbehaving department, watch your premium rise.

Act professionally your whole career, watch your premium drop.

Everybody likes incentives here. Police don't have many right now.

dantheman• 6 years ago

When you violate someones rights the actually get compensated, instead of getting a judgement that doesn't get paid.

R0b0t1• 6 years ago

The problem with this is a case against a professional tends to pull in other professionals as witnesses. You may not end up solving the problem because cops may refuse to testify against other cops. The solution is to rely on common sense, it is unknown if that will happen.

SahAssar3• 6 years ago

Of all the systems the US has I think the insurance industry is the last to come to mind to fix a problem.

Angostura2• 6 years ago

What would happen to your insuarance, if say you became part of a highly valuable but risky operation investigating crime syndicates? Sounds expensive.

foolinaround• 6 years ago

are police paid like doctors?

what happened in healthcare will likewise happen with policing... where many wont serve figuring its not worth it... overall, safety will be reduced.

asdff6• 6 years ago

I don't see how this isn't paid for by the taxpayer. You say the cops should pay for it themselves, but we give the cops every dollar they have so who is really paying when it's your dollar being given to the cop to be given to an insurance provider?

In truth right now, departments self insure for malpractice and spend a ton of money on litigation. They don't care how much it costs, the taxpayer always pays. You can actually get fired after being sued and you just get hired in a department the next town over, because malpractice insurance isn't going to do squat about the boys club mentality that pollutes American police departments. Doctors never protect their own over malpractice like the police routinely do, so we shouldn't even entertain using the model doctors use when it's apples and oranges to begin with.

chrischen2• 6 years ago

Isn’t this one of the reasons why US healthcare is so unaffordable?

tfyoung• 6 years ago

That seems like it would end up with police being incentivised to turn a blind eye to those who can afford expensive lawyers more than they already do?

paulmendoza• 6 years ago

I dont think insurance is the solution. Instead take the money from the retirement fund.

diegs• 6 years ago

This actually exists

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2019/03/22/705914833/epis...

I think the problem is that the system has historically obfuscated a lot of the malpractice.

So I think the real reform is more transparency (body cameras and other things) to make sure infractions are actually exposed.

sergefaguet• 6 years ago

Thing is this doesn’t merely exist as these cards. It is extremely easy to get out of police incidents with social skills and high-quality ability to manipulate people. Because people are fallible. So there will always be differential applications of justice because justice is a game, just like every other social system.

And automated policing can be played too, just in slightly different ways.

So when people are shocked by this or talk about how this must be fixed in one way or another that shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how complex reality works and how systems are implemented. And wishful thinking.

Instead it is much more interesting to understand how things work and to embrace them. And if someone refuses to accept reality, it will be to their detriment.

lotsofpulp2• 6 years ago

Instead it is much more interesting to understand how things work and to embrace them. And if someone refuses to accept reality, it will be to their detriment.

Are you suggesting we embrace police giving certain members of society more rights or ability to break the rules more than others?

bena2• 6 years ago

If.

You forgot the "if".

It is extremely easy to get out of police incidents with social skills and high-quality ability to manipulate people if you happen to be a white male.

So while justice may be a game to you, to a significant portion of the American public, it's a game they've already lost.

Ask a black family and a white family what "the talk" means. You will get two answers. For white families, "the talk" is about sex. For black families, "the talk" is about how you might just killed because your skin is a little too dark to be walking in certain areas. The talk is about how to keep your hands visible at all times when you have any encounter with police. The talk is about how you will be treated as less than other people, you cannot let that ever make you angry, never let it cause your voice to raise, to always be conciliatory. Because you might get killed.

So I'm glad you find it interesting. It still needs to be fixed.

JadeNB4• 6 years ago

It is extremely easy to get out of police incidents with social skills and high-quality ability to manipulate people.

In the US at least, I think that this is only true for white people, or at least for people who appear to be high-status. I don't see any way a homeless person could avoid being moved out of a park or, more dramatically, George Floyd could have avoided being murdered, by social skills and manipulative ability.

anm896• 6 years ago

Sure people are fallible. Our system makes it particularly easy and rewarding to be fallible when you are a cop. Let's fix that.

I'm all for being realistic. So let's alter the incentive structure in a way that realistically improves this. This is the exact kind of issua our congress is designed to be there to legislate on

justchilly2• 6 years ago

Is there evidence that this is big enough problem that it warrants a major party to take it up as a major part of their platform? Against a backdrop of climate change, disease, the economy, and so on. To share a perspective that many on the right have, this seems like a problem but one that gets far more attention than it deserves because it elicits strong emotions, riles up voters, etc.

lotsofpulp2• 6 years ago

this seems like a problem but one that gets far more attention than it deserves because it elicits strong emotions, riles up voters, etc.

Undermining trust in society is an enormous problem. The whole reason the west was successful is because people can go about their day without having to worry about nominal costs of corruption in day to day life.

Also, many issues can be handled at one time, and this is a pretty straight forward and quick and easy problem to fix. It’s obviously illegal, it’s obviously corruption, the only question is how much does society want to tolerate it. And the more it tolerates it, the more the parameters of which corruption is okay gets pushed.

Eventually, you end up like a third world country where you expect to pay a bribe or know someone to get anything done.

Edit: also, notice that the US currently has a president whose well known business practice was to not pay vendors and tangle up them up in court. And he’s openly proud about it. In any high trust society, brazen theft and dishonesty like that would be highly shameful, much less get you elected as a leader.

bennysonething• 6 years ago

The principle that everyone is equal before the law is a corner stone of any society that can claim to be free. Police are sworn to up hold the the law, this is a systematic undermining of the rule of law. If it was a few unorganised officers doing this then yeah it could be ignored maybe at the highest levels of government, but it's not.

ElijahLynn2• 6 years ago

Part of the issue is I bet the vast majority of U.S. politicians have one of these cards themselves and use it routinely.

thinkmassive• 6 years ago

There's been protests against police behavior happening non-stop since May in some areas of the country. Many people consider it an important issue.

tehjoker2• 6 years ago

lmao millions of people are in the streets

justin66• 6 years ago

Against a backdrop of climate change, disease, the economy, and so on. To share a perspective that many on the right have, this seems like a problem but one that gets far more attention than it deserves because it elicits strong emotions, riles up voters, etc.

That's really the problem with the right. Constantly downplaying issues like police reform so they can focus on climate change... wait, what?

on_and_off2• 6 years ago

it goes deeper than having laws against police abuse though.

As I understand it, the police investigates police abuses. I find that very shocking. My own country has lots of the same issues, but at least it is a separate branch of police which investigates abuse, not a colleague who will have to deal with the backlash if they report dirty acts.

Also DAs have to prosecute these crimes. The same DAs who have to work day to day with the same police department.

There are huge conflicts of interest in there. We need both to end qualified immunity (I did not go into this, but it has soo many issues as well) and have an organization dedicated to investigate police abuse. It needs both to have the authority to do so and to be entirely independent from the accused.

note : in the context here this is not just police corruption (even though that's something that should be taken seriously) but any kind of police abuse.

ordinaryradical• 6 years ago

This is why the public defender's office should be handling the prosecuting of police and the DA should become their defender. You maintain the adversial nature of the current legal system, and you also fund the PD office more effectively. Win win win.

JadeNB4• 6 years ago

As I understand it, the police investigates police abuses. I find that very shocking. My own country has lots of the same issues, but at least it is a separate branch of police which investigates abuse, not a colleague who will have to deal with the backlash if they report dirty acts.

Also in the US we have (or can have—I don't know the statistics on how many districts have them) a separate branch that investigates the police: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_affairs_(law_enforcem... . They're still police, though.

anm896• 6 years ago

Very good point independent enforcement would need to be part of any solution.

jimbob45• 6 years ago

Police corruption is a nebulous issue prone to outlier emotional anecdotes. It can never be “solved” and can be used, as seen in the parent post, to justify virtually any policy. It is incredibly difficult to accurately study and the data can be highly subjective.

peterpeppers2• 6 years ago

Great point.

Many citizens don't know that "qualified immunity" is a thing that protects police officers from being held accountable.

QUOTE: "Tragically, thousands have died at the hands of law enforcement over the years, and the death toll continues to rise," said Judge Carlton Reeves, of the US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi. "Qualified immunity has served as a shield for these officers, protecting them from accountability."

SOURCES: - https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/05/ask-the-author-reuters-on...

- https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/qualified_immunity

- https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/04/politics/qualified-immunity-f...

- https://www.npr.org/2020/06/12/876212065/an-immune-system

aqme28• 6 years ago

The craziest thing to me about qualified immunity is that no law was ever passed to create it. It was invented out of whole cloth by 20 years of supreme court decisions.

muststopmyths• 6 years ago

Qualified immunity only applies to civil lawsuits.

The real problem is the prosecutors are tight with the cops and will never bring criminal charges against them.

Take that one cop who shot the woman in Minneapolis by accident. He was sent to jail. There was something different about that case I can't quite put my finger on.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/07/us/minneapolis-police-sen...

(Edit: typo)

bigmilesjr• 6 years ago

Exactly. good points

tehjoker2• 6 years ago

They're not going to do that, which is why people asking for harm reduction call for defunding the police. They are harmful, so we need less of them. They don't prevent crime, so there's little point to having them around.

Other problems with America stem from allowing a few people to control everything who then run rampant. Rather we should restructure things with stronger institutions that have more democratic buy in.

scarface743• 6 years ago

Who is going to investigate the police? How many police officers are willing to report wrongdoing on their fellow officers? How many politicians or DA’s are willing to be “tough on police”?

No party is going to run on a platform of being tough on police. Most Americans actually “Back the Blue”. They protect the good folks from “them”.

anm896• 6 years ago

Make an independent body with only this job.

gowld3• 6 years ago

Democrats have been working on it for over a decade. Even George W Bush engaged in some consent decrees, under the auspices Joe Biden's 1994 crime bill.

It's only in the past 4 years that the Federal government stopped trying to reduce police brutality and started openly encouraging it.

ridgeguy• 6 years ago

Really think these would be helpful:

1. Demilitarize police 2. Make police disciplinary and complaint records public 3. Eliminate qualified immunity for police

These would be a good starting point.

prostoalex• 6 years ago

It seems that a bunch of countries with centralized police forces have an institute of ombudsman or other people representatives, whose operations are taxpayer-funded and provide free/cheap venues to someone who’s been wronged by the police or other authorities.

In the US alternatives seem to be

* reporting to internal affairs, which is kinda laughable and conflict-prone as that dept reports to the chief of police

* have a PR-worthy case appealing enough for ACLU or some law firm to take your case pro bono

* finance it yourself, unless it just so happens that your assets have been seized by the agency that wronged you, in which case it’s back to the other two

Edward Snowden points out the ridiculousness of his situation in “Permanent Record” - in a fair court trial NSA’s argument would be fair game, but his own counter-argument would disclose classified information and would therefore be inadmissible.

AmericanChopper2• 6 years ago

This type of case isn’t very clear cut, because a police officer is allowed to let somebody off with a warning. They’re obviously not allowed to let PBA members off as a blanked policy, but good luck proving that they’re doing it.

I worked with one police department once a long time ago that tried to institute a policy never letting police or police union member off with warnings. So if an officer stopped a car for an infraction, and found out the driver was police or a police union member, they had to give them a ticket for it. It was arguably pretty successful, especially since there were a lot of rumours that people were driving about with union cards trying to get tickets (no idea how true that was).

sokoloff3• 6 years ago

It seems it would take about 15 minutes for a signaling mechanism to emerge. Cars that had a particular shield sticker left of the license plate would not be stopped. (The display of such stickers would probably be protected speech.)

acituan5• 6 years ago

I find it naive that people directly jump to policy design phase and start suggesting fixes. This framing implies that current policies are a result of not having thought any better at the time of enactment and simply fixing these codes will fix everything else. It is not like there is a shortage of policy experts and academics on these topics. They have had better ideas than any of us can slap together on a hacker forum.

I want to suggest another framing; some of the problems current policies give way might as well be features and not a bugs. It certainly has the desired consequences for certain stakeholders. The emotional reactions and lack thereof the public has based on the general impression police casts might as well be "working as intended". Without figuring out that link, designing the best policy solution will still achieve nothing.

anm896• 6 years ago

I would make this same argument in some cases but this is something with a clear route to action and would be a single piece of legislation to implement. I wouldn't call enforcing existing laws and hold up the basic tenets of our system "jumping to policy design".

Yes I understand the current system benefits a lot of stakeholders. I directly acknowledge that in my post. Unless you are saying the police are going to coup the government to prevent passing legislation here than there isn't much they could do if you got support for this legislation.

gorgoiler• 6 years ago

One could also advocate for truth and reconciliation with victims, alongside an amnesty for all past police crimes. Finding any kind of masterminds behind the current culture and bringing them to justice doesn’t feel tractable.

The situation sometimes feels bad enough to warrant drastic measures, though these feelings have increased a lot since I expatriated, but the linked article is also genuinely shocking.

kyle_martin1• 6 years ago

I'm not convinced. Show me at least three examples where this works in an existing government jobs that matches the same criteria-- extreme risk, unpredictable situations, low pay, low appreciation.

Perhaps you could work as a police officer in the USA for a few years to get an authentic perspective. Based on your ideas, it seems like you're a large consumer of media narrative. There's no magic pill buddy.

kiba• 6 years ago

I doubt harsher sentences or new policies will fix anything. I think what would be more effective is that the police see punishments for any wrongdoings at all, but that's not even my preferred strategies.

austincheney• 6 years ago

Police should recieve drastically stronger charges and sentences when they violate the law, not the other way around.

The problem that most people are concerned with is implicit bias, which includes systemic racism. Corruption is important too but it’s a matter of probable intent where implicit bias is certainly not. That said be very explicit about which problem you wish solved in which priority because will not be solved in the same way.

The distinction is important because if police are to be held to a higher standard for ethics violations, such as anti-corruption, those standards cannot themselves be resultant from systemic bias, such as guilt by association, and achieve the outcome you are hoping for. It has to come from provable intent and legal common person standards (expectation of knowledge). Additionally there needs to be a clear distinction as to whether more aggressive anti-corruption is an enforcement action or a sentencing recommendation. That distinction bears its own second and third order consequences.

Getting that wrong to satisfy a hasty generalization will produce all kinds of unintended consequences not directly associated with policing.

stanski• 6 years ago

No party would ever take this on. They might mumble something out of the corner of their mouth to get elected but politicians are way too scared of the police union.

This is not a problem with the US only and goes beyond systemic racism too, even though that's what's in focus right now.

SMAAART• 6 years ago

Also available on eBay (of course)

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2380057.m...

cma• 6 years ago

Sounds like China's social credit system but maybe worse in some ways.

bitwize• 6 years ago

Literal get out of jail free cards. JHC.

andrewxdiamond• 6 years ago

In Ohio it’s is common to see license plates with police badges or stickers on them. They are handed out to friends and family and deter officers from pulling you over.

skizm• 6 years ago

Almost all cops I know are specifically told to take all things that could identify them as cops or friends of cops off their cars, windows, etc. since there is so much targeted violence and crime specifically directed against police. And this is in relatively safe NJ suburban areas. Tires on their personal cars get slashed all the time due to having a badge in a window or similar.

asdff6• 6 years ago

People drive pickup trucks with a 6' trump flag and a 6' thin blue line flag mounted to each side of the bed in the midwest. different animal than the east coast.

donohoe• 6 years ago

I had one of these.

I was given it not having slightest idea what it was for (was only in the NYC/US about two years at that point). I was told its meaning a couple of years later when I found it again during a move.

I've thrown it out.

While I appreciate the gesture from the person who gave it to me, I was repelled by what it represented in terms of how privilege and the police system work.

Grimm1• 6 years ago

This has been a common thing forever. Whether it's right is very much and should be up for discussion but I'm surprised at how many people seem to be learning this for the first time.

Same thing worked with the small silver shields you could give out. I don't really agree with how policing is done in the US and it has started more than one fight with my long retired former police father but as a matter of practicality I still carry his silver shield with me.

He hasn't been an officer since I was 5 or so but even in high school the active police families and the families with ada's or prosecutors all had PBA cards and would give them out.

snapetom• 6 years ago

Very much been around forever. The PBA cards are common in NY and NJ, where cops are basically a legalized mafia. In areas where PBA cards are not the norm, a simple business card with the officer's signature plays the same role.

"If there's a problem, you can check with my friend Officer so and so. Here's his card."

yadco• 6 years ago

Can't find any evidence in this article.

ElijahLynn2• 6 years ago

I know two people who had these in New Jersey. One used to speed all the time and never get a ticket or warnings. Super convenient for them. It was a legit card, a metal one, I saw it. Pretty corrupt there in New Jersey.

xphilter• 6 years ago

Wait till y’all learn about “fraternal order of police” fundraisers and car stickers identifying donors, allowing “discretion” to be used by the cop to let the violation go.

caiobegotti• 6 years ago

So... "protection" like under the mafia but only if you can afford the state price, so its supporters invariably are high in the food^Wdecision chain. It doesn't seem like a very democratic rule of law.

CarbyAu• 6 years ago

What I don't get is:

- The police need social capital. It helps enormously if they can be take at face value for "just doing their job". And this would help in the minor day-to-day interactions that makes up the majority of their working lives.

- Not only is it blatant corruption, the very existence of such cards harms the whole police forces social relationship! It is a "associate infraction with a cop!" card!

If I were a true friend of the police, I would:

- let them do their job fairly (while not letting them get away with unfair)

- not try to associate a cop buddy of mine with my poor decisions!

classics2• 6 years ago

Around here you see a lot of people with plastic stars they give out for “donating” to police organizations screwed onto the rear license plate.

fareesh• 6 years ago

In the USA legislators and others in government have publicly voiced their support of, contributed to, and organized bail funds for specific groups of people based on their views on particular topics. One Presidential candidate's campaign (through its staffers) has also paid money towards something called the "Minnesota Freedom Fund". Why is there a contribution only to this fund? If you protest animal testing and are arrested for some similar crime, where is your bail fund? In those cases you have to organize the money yourself, people in your government don't organize it for you.

Philosophically, government is supposed to serve everyone equally, but depending on the political views of the alleged criminal, or the self-proclaimed cause that they are supporting while performing allegedly illegal acts under the banner of "civil disobedience" or "peaceful protest", there is an availability of bail funds, selective prosecution, and all sorts of other features of the justice system available on a selective basis - i.e. the banner under which the illegality takes place.

If the principle of selective/unequal dispensation of justice is wrong, it ought to be criticized irrespective of the form it takes. When it is ignored in some forms but other forms result in outrage, it's difficult not to question the motivations of whoever is amplifying this particular flavor of bias.

If it is acceptable for the system to consider banners and offer different features to offenders depending on which banner they are flying when they interact with the system, then this is also acceptable.

I personally would prefer a conversation that looks at the problem of selective enforcement across many spheres.

ijtioerhgser• 6 years ago

Or we could just eliminate cash bail, for everyone. It's been eliminated in my state for most crimes, and they are trying it out in other states as well. It's not perfect, but it results in a lot less people in jail because they can't pay, and it hasn't made us any less safe.

Otherwise, I don't think you're going to solve the issue of "people only donating bail money to people they like." Because people are going to spend money the way they want.

jrochkind1• 6 years ago

Last paragraph:

“Policing was never meant to be held accountable in the first place, not in a meaningful, substantial way,” Wall said. He cautioned against focusing too much on the injustice of PBA cards. “Be careful that the outrage [doesn't] become directed in too narrow a way. The real outrage should be directed at the nature of policing itself.”

Ice_cream_suit2• 6 years ago

This is a common sort of corruption, worldwide.

Here in Australia, my receptionist has got out of a few minor traffic infringements because her husband is a friend of a cop.

PostPlummer• 6 years ago

30 years ago (quite exact), we drove back after a 48 hour "party" in Berlin (Roger Waters playing "the wall" at the broken down wall). We got stopped at the border (Germany > Holland) and I drove. We where tired, still high and half drunk.

When the border patrol asked me (the driver) for papers, it took me a long time to produce them and one of my friends woke up, asked what was going on and pulled out his official "bridge operator" badge. Showed it (before I was even capable to find my driving licence and passport) to the trooper and just said "Hi partner": we where waved through.

When I asked what the actual F just had happened, he told me his job made him an "non commissioned officer" and that was all it took for us to be treated as part of the blue family, who go to great lengths to "help each other".

Different times, different continent, same rules.

nphd• 6 years ago

I feel like we're at a crossroads: Hire huge battalions of union dues-paying forever-rookie police behind an iron curtain and arm them to the teeth, or Operate a modernized, transparent, outcomes-based criminal justice system. It would be interesting to understand why so many politicians and police themselves talk about the latter while quietly implementing the former. What's in it for them?

HeavyStorm• 6 years ago

So "get out of jail free cards" do exist. And here I thought that GTA came up with them.

In 1997

Police-issued "courtesy cards" help friends and family out of minor infractions

Related Stories