The problem here seems to be more the system. I can imagine the cop might be considering some citation quota that she has to meet. Meanwhile, it's also likely her performance is in no way measured by the satisfaction level of the region she polices. There's also the possible racial factor but that's a whole more complicated can of worms.

Probably wanted to avoid all the paperwork for discharging his firearm.

Inb4 he is passed over for promotion because he failed to meet some bullshit quota set by the higher ups.

That man is real police.

Black people and police are not equivalent groups for comparison. Police are a special group that have legal authority to use force, including deadly, against people and you are at their whim if they aren't a good person.

I know that you used black people because you are trying to push that back on other people (projecting is the term, I believe) and black people are on your mind. I know, I know, you aren't racist. You are just "stating facts."

Police are just people. Some good, some bad. I've dealt with great ones and I've dealt with ones that lack any semblance of honor or integrity. The major issue I have is that that accountability for police bad behavior is unreliable and varies greatly. I believe part of this is pure self interest in people saving their jobs and keeping their department looking good while backed by an "us vs. them" attitude that becomes prevalent among police over time.

I think the "us vs. them" attitude is a tough one to avoid for police departments. I think multiple factors feed into that. Politicians outlawing victimless crimes makes people take police less seriously and see police as a nuisance instead of a helping force. Managing police departments by quotas and numbers instead of hiring good managers to actually manage people. Police unions that protect violent cops preventing the firing of known/shown unfit cops until they do something that is bad enough that even the union can't protect them. As a cop, you usually deal with the assholes of society which will taint your view over time. Well, it's not something that going to change quickly, but ignoring the problem with transparent and consistent accountability does nothing but kick that can down the road.

Pharma reps also often have a spending quota. You read that write, they HAVE to spend a certain amount of money on dinners etc each month.

They don't care if you are even a doctor in a specialty that could write for their drug.

Yes, she's great at pointing that out.

What's the solution?

Quota's of protagonists sex? Replacing "damsel" with "prince" in distress? Getting rid of chainmail bikinis?

Oh, and how do we propagate that to the entire entertainment industry?

There is nothing wrong with playing a prince and rescuing a princess. There is nothing wrong with the princess being helpless. There is nothing wrong with Femmeshep kicking the shit out of the reapers and saving every being in the known universe, one of the most badass female protagonists around. More female protagonists = great, bring it on, but that's no reason to throw out a trope as old as time (incidentally, a trope enjoyed by a great many women who like to watch sappy romances where the charming fellow rescues the woman from her crappy life...).

Her series predicates on the concept that players are too fucking dumb to understand the difference between real life and the game. That if you play Duke Nukem, you'll walk around slapping girls tits and saying the most inappropriate things you can think of.

It's exactly the same tripe that Jack Thompson was peddling back in the day, games change how you think. And, for most people (ie. the mentally stable...), it was wrong then and it's wrong now. Your upbringing and parental guidance, and the relationship your male role models have with women, are far more likely to determine whether or not a man is likely to be sexist/misogynist than a few games with scantily clad girls needing a big strong man to save them... Society has changed to become more accepting of race, creed, sexual orientation and, of course, women, and it will continue to become so even if the old trope of the princess is in another castle hangs around. It may take generations before inequality dies out, if it ever does. It's not something you can fix by complaining about games.

I can only judge the police on a person by person basis when they act independently.

Myself, I respect the police, and I obey and cooperate with them as required.
I've never done anything to necessitate any negative behaviour from them, so from experience, I have only good things to say about them. Though, I must admit, I've encountered some that were amazingly nice, and also some that were absolutely on a power trip.

BUT I know of three scenarios which Make them less than desirable.

1). The term Police should be synonymous with Peace (Peace officer). They are a team created to keep people safe. They uphold laws. Laws are meant to keep people safe.
But when they are used for other things, like aggressively engaging groups of protestors, they often behave against the people they have sworn to protect in insite more violent behaviours just so they can create arrests.

2). Police are given quotas. This is inherently corrupt. It's only purpose is to extort monies from the public and creates tensions between them and the people they are supposed to be helping.
It serves no purpose and forces even the good police to commit crimes against the people just so they can keep their jobs. These quotas are often passed down from ranking officers or higher up in the system.
This includes everything from Stop-and-frisk policies, to Speeding-infractions, to Roadside-vehicle-searches. It gives police a legal excuse to badger, bully, extort and abuse the people.

3). There are police not cut out for the job, and we've seen this in video time and again. The officer labelled as the "Hot Head". They over react, insight conflict, and use their position to create problems where none exist.
I can only attest to this example from what I see in the news. Being from Canada, we have different laws than the US, and I see this abuse most often in news from the US.
This type of officer either joined the system so they could be above the law, or has been tarnished and gone bitter along the way. They need to be weeded out and removed from duty.

All this being siad, the Police is an exclusive club. They are a close knit group of members which stand up and support each other. This could be a good thing. they need to rely on each other, especially in times of life or death.
Unfortunately, they also stand up for each other in times where they shouldn't. They protect the wrong doers in the system, cover up irregularities and just basically lie to cover up those officers breaking the law.
It's a system of "not covering up, means you can't trust others to come to your aid."

So, yes, we need the police. We like the police.
But if they don't rethink the way they operate, they only increase the gap between helping ind hindering the people. On the current course, they are forcing a large wedge between themselves and the people that are paying their pay check to keep them safe.
If you can't trust the police, they are no longer the police -- just thugs.

The good police need to stand up against the police that are abusing the system and making their job harder on a daily basis. Fix the system, fix the interaction, and then it will fix the work environment police work in.

This is not enforcing the law.
They could do that by actually observing innocent people.
It's called policing.

This looks more like they have quotas.

Before the U.S. invasion, Iraq had an integrated society, with different religions inter-marrying, and different religions working in government.
After the U.S. took over, people were chosen for state work according to religious quota (something new to iraq), and religion became a 'big deal' in regards to putting food on the table.
General dislikes turned into conflicts.

The "Shia v Sunni" thing is more hyperbole for western audiences, than it is a matter of recent history.
Saddam mostly oppressed areas rife with insurgent groups. Conflict festers and spreads. People die, their families/friends become militant, then they die, and their families/friends become militant, etc, etc, etc. Families/friends live near each other, so it spreads geographically. Eventually you find cities or regions that have managed to upturn.
Like any city/region, similar people tend to live together. So you in effect have groups/cultures vs government.
Hence why the internal conflict was by city/region (just like it is/was in Syria), and why it had a cultural flavor.
Granted, there is always some backlash that spills into a community at large, when a portion of it is identified as a 'problem'. Point is, there was not some eugenic ethnic/religious conflict going on.

The real 'oppression by religion' is happening today.
Neighborhoods have become mono-religious. Minorities have left their neighborhoods and fled to regions that are mostly 'of their own kind' - because nobody wants to stick around to see if they become the next target.

Best thing that can happen now is what happened to Syria after WW2 : Some other power steps in, chops up the country into smaller pieces, and populates each piece with a particular culture (eg. Syria was taken by Britain and France, split up, and became Syria + Lebanon + Jordan - granted the post ww2 split of Syria had more to do with the the last gasps of colonialism, and less to do with stabilization. 'Fun' note : It's the Syrian expulsion the French colonial rulers in the 1970's, and the subsequent French 'black eye', that set the tone for why France is so happy to support whoever wants to overthrow the Syrian government.).

-scheherazade

@ 3:13 -
"I'm sure that if this happened to me, it could happen to ...
...
...
... a bunch of other people."

I don't want to put words into his mouth, but let's just say what everybody hears there: it could happen to anyone committing the "crime" of driving while black.

@CreamK is right, arrest quotas and for-profit jails are largely to blame for crap like this; well, that and obviously the scum cops who came real close to getting away with it here. I'm a pretty pro-police guy, but a few bad eggs like this can sure cast a stink over a lot of the good guys. Glad they are getting some comeuppance.

Scary to contemplate how often this might happen with the kind of evidence that cleared him either A) not existing (gotta be REAL careful about how much benefit of the doubt we give law enforcement) or B) being successfully hidden and never coming to light. Very scary.

Arrest quotas and private jails. The latter has a contract with the state and the state has the OBLIGATION to provide full prison. So they make up crimes and exaggerate real ones. Since it's clear that black man gets the heaviest sentences by a a large margin, they are easy prey.

Cops falsifying evidence, tricking, lying and threatening suspects is an ancient tradition in the law enforcement. Even the good cops do it, they just simply believe their own judgement that the person x is guilty so they are prepared to a "little bit of evil". End justifies the means. Even when the person is declared not guilty by overwhelming evidence, they still think "he did it, i'm sure of it".

Back to the video at hand, I find it a bit hypocritical that the U.S. is criticizing the hunt. Yeah, dolphins are cute. The idea of someone killing one is probably uncomfortable to pretty much any culture that hasn't spent centuries eating them. But I think there's a bit of ethnocentricsm going on here.

How many cattle, chicken, and turkeys get slaughtered every day in the U.S. in the most horrible ways--nevermind the horrific conditions most have to endure from birth until death? Where's the international outcry over that?

The primary complaint of this video seems to be that the dolphins die slowly, but the video fails to mention that's only if the procedure is done wrong. It's done that way precisely because Japanese laws require the butchering to be done quickly and when done correctly they die within seconds. I imagine the whales killed by Inuit's in their traditional hunts don't die much quicker (see http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/20131008/save-whales-inuit-whalers-wary-whaling-commission-quotas for more details).

Basically, while I find the method they use to kill disturbingly inhumane, I also don't see the need for the international community to intervene in the hunt unless it can be shown that the hunt is adversely affecting the population. The primary reason hunting dolphins is stupid is because the meat contains alarmingly high concentrations of mercury which pose a major health risk to humans that habitually eat the meat.

Nah, he should of just left and called security or the cops. Let them use up some of their pepper spray quota.

This type of stupidity doesn't bug me. No real damage is happening.

When fuckers throw EGGS is when major paint damage occurs. You see someone throw eggs at a car "for fun" you have my permission to smack them around. The cracking egg shells wreck paint terribly. People who egg someone's car are vandalizing it.

I've been watching a lot about the knockout game as of late. It really does seem to be a hate crime (It's also called Polar Bearing, because it's victims tend to be white). It's caused quite a stir in the black community, as those who know better seem to be cringing and distancing themselves from the attacks as well as possible.

Ultimately, it's the fault of a few individuals who feel powerless enough in their own lives to try to take it out on others. I see a connection between this feeling of powerlessness and the "stop and frisk" laws passed in many of the cities where the knockout game first became popular.

I think the solution to this kind of violence is improving police relations with the affected communities. The first step is getting rid of "stop and frisk", the second removal of police arrest quotas, the third would be reducing the black prison population's non-violent offenders.

It was triplets, but since the Chinese government has a 1 child quota, its now down to the last two fighting it out to survive.

This beyond shameful practice needs to be loudly and publicly shoved in the federal governments face, demanding a stop to funding a quota based drug war targeting defenseless special needs children. As if it isn't evil enough to manipulate impressionable, peer pressure driven kids without going after easy targets already ostracized by whatever condition, making them even more vulnerable.

Isn't there a special level of hell reserved for those who hurt children for profit?