The Largest Street Gang in America

[Bono]

First off, this is around 56 minutes long, but the basic idea can be understood in about five minutes.

Also, some of the footage may disturb sensitive viewers.

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=54162036

[Zarn]

Not all of them, but it is certainly a significant number.

[Lunar]

It's an interesting collection of police brutality videos, watched about 90% of it. 

None of the images until towards the end are especially graphic.  Blurry images of people being shot in the back, but not especially bloody. 

[dead0man]

You have a better way to control crime?  Take out the human element?

[Alcon]

Do civilians have lower violent crime rates?  If not, I'm not sure what points trying to be made.

[Lunar]

Do civilians have lower violent crime rates?  If not, I'm not sure what points trying to be made.

That there may be some institutional problems with oversight and police culture that need to be fixed?

[Torie]

I had a DUI incident last month, and the cops in jail were indeed brutal. In due course, I am going to do something about it. If I don't, with well, my skills and resume, who will?  I don't plan to sue, but I do plan to pull certain levers.  I consider it my civic duty actually.

I might add that when the cops realized that I was a lawyer, they did become considerably more cautious.  But that was several hours later.

[Joe Republic]

I had a DUI incident last month

[Torie]

I had a DUI incident last month

sh**t happens.

[Rob]

Pigs are pigs. You just have to talk to them the right way.

[Alcon]

Do civilians have lower violent crime rates?  If not, I'm not sure what points trying to be made.

That there may be some institutional problems with oversight and police culture that need to be fixed?

Sure, but the street gang analogy is borderline offensive glitter then, and it's pretty much the running theme of the docu.  I was curious about what sort of "basic idea" was Bono's take-away.

[Lunar]

Do civilians have lower violent crime rates?  If not, I'm not sure what points trying to be made.

That there may be some institutional problems with oversight and police culture that need to be fixed?

Sure, but the street gang analogy is borderline offensive glitter then, and it's pretty much the running theme of the docu.  I was curious about what sort of "basic idea" was Bono's take-away.

I think Bono's "basic idea," at least how I interpreted it, was that this was not a literal gang by conventional definitions.  The "basic idea" of the video is that it's a video about two things: 1) police brutality 2) the rejection of police institutions of any sort of oversight.  If you wanted to quibble that they aren't actually a "gang," by reasonable definitions, sure, I'll grant you that.  But I recently started a thread titled "Why most of you suck," purely for the offensive glitter of it all.

And sure, it's borderline offensive glitter, but Bono didn't invent the phrase himself and the video is genuinely worth watching.   The video is at its worst elements at the very beginning and very end, actually. 

[Scam of God]

Does this surprise anybody? The police are the bodily representatives of the State's monopoly of force; it is their job to act like egregious dickheads to the vast majority of the population, particularly the lower classes. They know only one law - the law of steel. And they serve only one master - force.

[Lunar]

Does this surprise anybody? The police are the bodily representatives of the State's monopoly of force; it is their job to act like egregious dickheads to the vast majority of the population, particularly the lower classes. They know only one law - the law of steel. And they serve only one master - force.

What do you feel is the solution to this?

[Scam of God]

Does this surprise anybody? The police are the bodily representatives of the State's monopoly of force; it is their job to act like egregious dickheads to the vast majority of the population, particularly the lower classes. They know only one law - the law of steel. And they serve only one master - force.

What do you feel is the solution to this?

Quite honestly? I'm in favor of privatizing the police to as great an extent as possible. And not because I think "RAWR THE FREE MARKET RULES ALL D00DZ!!1111!", but because I think the economic burden of assuming ownership of the police force would cause them to massively scale back their operations. I do believe that there is room where the interests of the minorities and of the poor and a free-market can meet. Our present system is almost openly hostile to their interests. No investor, no matter how wealthy, could possibly meet the costs of our "War on Drugs", for instance, nor would he likely be interested in doing so.

[Alcon]

Hmm, I jumped around.  I'll give it a fair shake.  I suppose I may be falsely recalling Bono's old writing on cops.  I'm the last to say that police culture is flush with oversight .  I come from a town with a police force with a healthy history of corruption, and I have a harmless friend who was put through the wringer (on a BS civil case for that matter) by a cop I will politely describe as possibly psychotic.  Even there, in a case that didn't involve any sort of systemic challenge to the police, there was no recourse whatsoever.  And in this case I think the roots of the problem are systemic and cultural at even the most simplistic level of analysis.

I just, y'know, am not sure that Bono was intending that message, but my memory has been faulty before.

[Lunar]

Ein: But the private market would still pick arbitrary (although perhaps economically incentivized) winners and  losers in terms of the recipients of police force, no? 

How would the free market "scale-back" police work anyhow?  To take it to a local level, when a local community college in my temporary, Northeastern California area, decides to contract its security out, not only are the fees higher, but the enforcement of minor rule violations like rolling stops and jaywalking skyrockets exponentially. 

[Alcon]

Quite honestly? I'm in favor of privatizing the police to as great an extent as possible. And not because I think "RAWR THE FREE MARKET RULES ALL D00DZ!!1111!", but because I think the economic burden of assuming ownership of the police force would cause them to massively scale back their operations. I do believe that there is room where the interests of the minorities and of the poor and a free-market can meet. Our present system is almost openly hostile to their interests. No investor, no matter how wealthy, could possibly meet the costs of our "War on Drugs", for instance, nor would he likely be interested in doing so.

Yea, but what kind of free-market model would incentivize minority interests?  And what exactly are minority interests not represented in the police?  There are certainly racial issues surrounding the police, and a lack of recourse.  But is the cause of the police failure to represent minority issues really systemic (in a way addressed by a free-market model?), and how, and how do we make that model?

[Lunar]

Hmm, I jumped around.  I'll give it a fair shake.  I suppose I may be falsely recalling Bono's old writing on cops.  I'm the last to say that police culture is flush with oversight .  I come from a town with a police force with a healthy history of corruption, and I have a harmless friend who was put through the wringer (on a BS civil case for that matter) by a cop I will politely describe as possibly psychotic.  Even there, in a case that didn't involve any sort of systemic challenge to the police, there was no recourse whatsoever.  And in this case I think the roots of the problem are systemic and cultural at even the most simplistic level of analysis.

I just, y'know, am not sure that Bono was intending that message, but my memory has been faulty before.

that's all fair.  I actually watched 50 minutes of the video this morning (a bit hung over), and I found it worth the watch.  I had presumed "street gang" was just a catchy title, but if it's serious, then of course the messenger could be ridiculous, but the video still worthwhile.

I think the video especially picks up maybe half the way through where they start addressing the "code" of police oversight instead of mere police brutality incidents.  I think Bono seriously sells this video short by implying you only need to watch a few minutes. 

[Scam of God]

Ein: But the private market would still pick arbitrary (although perhaps economically incentivized) winners and  losers in terms of the recipients of police force, no?

No doubt. I'm not arguing that it's ideal, just that it's better than what we have now.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Because nobody could possibly afford to pay for such things as the "War on Drugs". I have no doubt that incidental occurrences of police brutality would actually increase under my desired system - but it would cease to be systematic, simply because nobody would be able to afford all of that. Under a privatized scheme, you'd probably see those programmes which are almost aimed at keeping the poor poor rolled back or entirely eliminated, because there'd be no funding for them. How many genuinely privatized prisons - with no financial support from any government - could afford to keep small drug offenders locked up?

[Lunar]

Interesting argument to combine this with the War on Drugs, which is a giant waste and undermines so much of our country's economy, security, and stability.  I don't think I'll be able to respond to that before bed without pondering the issue further, as I am one of those legalize-heroin loonies who believes that this current War on Drugs is doing more damage to America than Islamic terrorism.  

But I have to wonder if there is a better fix to the worst aspects of police culture than privatizing them off.  At some level it seems you need to fundamentally cultivate the need to serve the public good, something privatizing does not address. 

[Scam of God]

Interesting argument to combine this with the War on Drugs, which is a giant waste and undermines so much of our country's economy, security, and stability.  I don't think I'll be able to respond to that before bed without pondering the issue further, as I am one of those legalize-heroin loonies who believes that this current War on Drugs is doing more damage to America than Islamic terrorism.  

And I certainly don't disagree with you - I am in favor of legalizing every drug. But as long as the Federal government continues to bankroll such operations, then these violations of civil liberties and civil rights will remain inherent to the system, because there's no threat of bankruptcy to check them. If the police were working out of a limited, private budget, however, they'd have to choose what violations to respond to, and minor drug crimes would probably be at the bottom of their list.

[Lunar]

Interesting argument to combine this with the War on Drugs, which is a giant waste and undermines so much of our country's economy, security, and stability.  I don't think I'll be able to respond to that before bed without pondering the issue further, as I am one of those legalize-heroin loonies who believes that this current War on Drugs is doing more damage to America than Islamic terrorism.  

And I certainly don't disagree with you - I am in favor of legalizing every drug. But as long as the Federal government continues to bankroll such operations, then these violations of civil liberties and civil rights will remain inherent to the system, because there's no threat of bankruptcy to check them. If the police were working out of a limited, private budget, however, they'd have to choose what violations to respond to, and minor drug crimes would probably be at the bottom of their list.

[btw I added a bit more to the post above, this is a fairly rapid conversation and I tend to edit my posts a lot after submission]

But at some level  you would still need public price controls, at the very least, right?  Otherwise, private agencies would have every motive to pursue whatever achieves the most profit, regardless of the crime.  If drug crimes yield the most revenue, then a private agency would pursue that moreso than murders, which could be costly to investigate and prosecute, with relatively low economic yield.  

[Scam of God]

Quite honestly? I'm in favor of privatizing the police to as great an extent as possible. And not because I think "RAWR THE FREE MARKET RULES ALL D00DZ!!1111!", but because I think the economic burden of assuming ownership of the police force would cause them to massively scale back their operations. I do believe that there is room where the interests of the minorities and of the poor and a free-market can meet. Our present system is almost openly hostile to their interests. No investor, no matter how wealthy, could possibly meet the costs of our "War on Drugs", for instance, nor would he likely be interested in doing so.

Yea, but what kind of free-market model would incentivize minority interests?  And what exactly are minority interests not represented in the police?  There are certainly racial issues surrounding the police, and a lack of recourse.  But is the cause of the police failure to represent minority issues really systemic (in a way addressed by a free-market model?), and how, and how do we make that model?

Well, I think that I answered this pretty well in response to Lunar, but to elaborate: our centralized government can afford such abuses, because it can just pour more money into the system. A private police force, however, could be crushed under the weight of lawsuits if it tolerated abuses.

[Sewer]

A private police force, however, could be crushed under the weight of lawsuits if it tolerated abuses.

Not if they shoot you.