• When Police Abuse Is 'Normal'

    A new documentary on militarized police focuses on mundane, everyday, "legitimate" abuses.

    Jesse Walker
    Oct. 3, 2016

    I haven't seen the new documentary Do Not Resist, but Radley Balko's review at The Washington Post makes it sound like a must-watch. According to Balko, the movie avoids the sort of footage that usually dominates discussions of abusive policing: You don't see anyone killed, you don't see anyone beaten, you don't see a SWAT team storming the wrong address. "What makes this movie so powerful," he writes, "is its terrifying portrayal of the mundanities of modern policing."

    It's one thing to read about a "dynamic entry" drug raid in which the police mistakenly or intentionally kill someone, or in which someone mistakenly or intentionally kills a police officer. It's awful and tragic and unnecessary. "Do Not Resist" doesn't show one of those. It instead shows the sort of drug raid that's far more common. The movie depicts the raid from the beginning, as the officers from the Richland County Sheriff's Department tactical team are meeting to discuss strategy. Some are wearing T-shirts with the tactical team's logo. It's a human skull imposed over two crossed AR-15s.

    There are no children at the residence, the lead officer assures his colleagues. (There were.) There would be a significant quantity of illegal drugs at the house, another says. (There weren't.) The tactical team then proceeds to raid the home of a black family in Richland County. Most officers storm the front door with their guns while one shatters some side windows as a distraction. Minutes go by. The officers' body language eventually shows signs of frustration as their search for contraband continues to come up empty. Finally, someone finds a book bag with traces of marijuana at the bottom—not enough to smoke, much less sell. They arrest a young black man with long braids for possession....

    [The arrestee] runs a landscaping company to help pay for his education. The man later tells the officer that he was on his way to pick up some lawnmowers that morning. Knowing that he's about to be arrested, he asks the officer if he could tell his employee that he was arrested and won't be able to pick up the lawnmowers. He then gives the officer $876 in cash and asks it to give it to his employee to go pick up the mowers, along with a weed-eater.

    Instead, the officer confiscates the money under civil asset forfeiture laws.
    The rest of the review is here, and a trailer is below:




    http://reason.com/blog/2016/10/03/wh...buse-is-normal


    Sign up for a free account to add your comment!


    Comments 34 Comments
    1. Anti Federalist's Avatar
      Anti Federalist -
      Quote Originally Posted by HVACTech View Post
      are you playing dumb? or is this the real thing?
      So you have no answer?

      Of course you don't, because to suggest that somehow the bill of rights created the king/president, is ridiculous, on the face of it.

      Try harder.
    1. HVACTech's Avatar
      HVACTech -
      Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
      "To Secure the Blessing of Liberty, to ourselves and our posterity".

      And it failed.

      As predicted and warned.
      why do you keep skipping the word "federation" ?
      in general. "Constitution" is a much larger word for you...

      it was designed as a military and trade compact. why you ask?

      The War of 1812 was a military conflict that lasted from June 18, 1812 to February 18, 1815, fought between the United States of America and the United Kingdom, its North American colonies, and its Native American allies.

      what is YOUR excuse for bringing "Rights" into this diametric?

      if you want to play stupid on purpose....
      admit it. and dance like the jester that you are.


      the CONstitution was never designed to protect your "Rights" fool.
      that task was left for you to do.

      the candy ass anti federalist's cried poor baby...
      and that is why the Bill of Rights was tacked on, 3 years later.

      pussy.
    1. HVACTech's Avatar
      HVACTech -
      Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
      So you have no answer?

      Of course you don't, because to suggest that somehow the bill of rights created the king/president, is ridiculous, on the face of it.

      Try harder.


      are you off your med's again?
      if so. I apologize. I do try to be kind to the ignorant.....
    1. Anti Federalist's Avatar
      Anti Federalist -
      Quote Originally Posted by HVACTech View Post
      what is YOUR excuse for bringing "Rights" into this diametric?
      Because one of the prime directives of the document says that is the reason for it exist.
    1. bunklocoempire's Avatar
      bunklocoempire -
      Forced to pay tribute to the state god of Soteria, but I supposedly have religious freedom.
    1. CCTelander's Avatar
      CCTelander -
      Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
      You are quoting Hamilton as the supreme being on the Bill of Rights? That's like quoting Satan on the meaning of Jesus' words. The Constitution was a Hamiltonian coup to make a powerful central government; it worked beautifully.

      And stop calling @Anti Federalist names; if you want people to listen to you, act with reason and intelligence, not insults and name-calling.

      To that one, anyone who refuses to worship at the alter of the Almighty CONstitution is a heretic. Best to simply ignore IMO.
    1. HVACTech's Avatar
      HVACTech -
      Quote Originally Posted by CCTelander View Post
      To that one, anyone who refuses to worship at the alter of the Almighty CONstitution is a heretic. Best to simply ignore IMO.
      it would help if you knew what you were talking about. there is NOTHING mystical or magical about the word itself.
      all Republics have a Constitution. even China.
      "Constitution of the People's Republic of China"
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consti...ublic_of_China

      did you know that?
    1. Anti Federalist's Avatar
      Anti Federalist -
      Bump
    1. Weston White's Avatar
      Weston White -
      Quote Originally Posted by HVACTech View Post
      get your $#@! together. the Constitution and the bill of rights are NOT one and the same.
      I would tend to disagree, the 'Bill of Rights' merely serves as a container for the first ten Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. For as noted by Hamilton: "The truth is, after all the declamation we have heard, that the constitution is itself in every rational sense, and to every useful purpose, A BILL OF RIGHTS."
    1. Occam's Banana's Avatar
      Occam's Banana -
      Anyway, getting back on topic ...

      Here's a link to the Radley Balko article at WaPo, which was referenced in the OP:

      "Do Not Resist": A chilling look at the normalization of warrior cops
      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-warrior-cops/

      Some sad, sick stuff ...
    1. Anti Federalist's Avatar
      Anti Federalist -
      Quote Originally Posted by Weston White View Post
      I would tend to disagree, the 'Bill of Rights' merely serves as a container for the first ten Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. For as noted by Hamilton: "The truth is, after all the declamation we have heard, that the constitution is itself in every rational sense, and to every useful purpose, A BILL OF RIGHTS."
      Rational...yes to a rational mind that is how it is.

      HVACTech isn't quite rational.
    1. HVACTech's Avatar
      HVACTech -
      Quote Originally Posted by Weston White View Post
      I would tend to disagree, the 'Bill of Rights' merely serves as a container for the first ten Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. For as noted by Hamilton: "The truth is, after all the declamation we have heard, that the constitution is itself in every rational sense, and to every useful purpose, A BILL OF RIGHTS."
      if it is your intent to note, that the purpose of both documents are, "one and the same" you are correct.
      and we agree.

      AF gets his panties in a wad over the distinction between the two. and has been railing about it for nine years.
    1. Anti Federalist's Avatar
      Anti Federalist -
      Quote Originally Posted by HVACTech View Post
      AF gets his panties in a wad over the distinction between the two. and has been railing about it for nine years.
      The CONstitution's main body lays out what government is allowed to do, for the most part.

      Which, as was warned, is pretty much any damn thing it pleases.

      The Bill of Rights states what government is NOT allowed to do.

      Big difference.

      And I haven't been railing about it for nine years.

      I only started railing about it when it became painfully obvious that, due the fact that the AmeriKan people hate freedom and liberty so much, there was never any chance to return to what CONservatives called "strict constitutional constructionist" ideals.

      So, why bother?

      If we're all just engaged in post mortem mental masturbation, why not start over, start fresh, heed the warnings that the Anti-Federalists gave and not follow the same path that led us to this current tyranny?
    1. HVACTech's Avatar
      HVACTech -
      Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
      The CONstitution's main body lays out what government is allowed to do, for the most part.

      Which, as was warned, is pretty much any damn thing it pleases.

      The Bill of Rights states what government is NOT allowed to do.

      Big difference.

      And I haven't been railing about it for nine years.

      I only started railing about it when it became painfully obvious that, due the fact that the AmeriKan people hate freedom and liberty so much, there was never any chance to return to what CONservatives called "strict constitutional constructionist" ideals.

      So, why bother?

      If we're all just engaged in post mortem mental masturbation, why not start over, start fresh, heed the warnings that the Anti-Federalists gave and not follow the same path that led us to this current tyranny?
      Hmmm. let me think about... naw. nevermind.



    Sign up for a free account to add your comment!





    Continue / discuss in the forums Read More

  • Follow us on Twitter! Like us on Facebook! Subscribe to our top news RSS Feed! New! Subscribe to us on YouTube!