ForumsWEPRKelly Thomas Murder Trial

52 5092
SportShark
offline
SportShark
2,869 posts
4,445

As you may have heard, the police officers responsible for the savage and deadly beating of the special needs California man Kelly Thomas eluded justice in the courtroom last night. How is it that the people we employ to protect us can get away with disgusting acts of savagery like that?
What are your opinions on this pathetic verdict?
Do you feel threatened by our out of control police force?
How have the police become beyond reproach in the eyes of the law?
How does this injustice make you feel?

These are important things that I want you very much to share your opinions on.

  • 52 Replies
EmperorPalpatine
offline
EmperorPalpatine
9,410 posts
2,680

Probably because the military is generally deployed out of the country,

How about the National Guard then?

It's easier to convince a soldier to shoot a man if that man is holding an AK-47. Back in the states, where the "soldiers" are around Americans and are living in much more comfortable conditions, the enemy is much less prominent.

I don't get how this is a good reason to only hire people of average mental capacity.

potential civilians.

"If a person consistently reads and advocates the views expressed in a civilian publication, he may be a civilian."
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,602 posts
3,675

I don't get how this is a good reason to only hire people of average mental capacity.


You have to think in conspiracy theory logic.

The reason they gave was this: "The theory that those who scored too high could get bored with police work and leave soon after undergoing costly training."

In other words, they see policing as menial work that does not require intelligence. Questionable, given that you're entrusting these people to uphold the law and protect you, but certainly not on the order of previously suggested motives...

What bothers me more is that 125 is considered too intelligent. 125 isn't that high. Although I consider 100 stupid, so 125 is pretty much what I think of as &quotassably not an idiot" on a general level.
09philj
offline
09philj
2,880 posts
3,160

How is it that the people we employ to protect us can get away with disgusting acts of savagery like that?


The same way as neighbourhood watchmen get away with shooting random black people.

are expected to follow orders, regardless of what they are


This seems very open to abuse...
MattEmAngel
offline
MattEmAngel
7,744 posts
4,340

How about the National Guard then?


They have still been trained through boot camp to obey orders.

I don't get how this is a good reason to only hire people of average mental capacity.


The military doesn't have a cap on intelligence because, for one, it has a multitude of divisions and some require higher intelligence, and two, they are shooting/killing enemies. Like i just said, it's easier to convince someone to shoot another person when that person is a non-American with an assault rifle, regardless of that person's intelligence. "You have to shoot him before he shoots you."

A police officer on the other hand is not shooting foreigners with machine guns. They are Americans living in America. The phrase "you have to shoot him before he shoots you" is harder to live by when the enemy could be an unarmed schizophrenic (Kelly Thomas). A more intelligent man would be less likely to go over and beat him to death. I'm not saying being a police officer isn't stressful or dangerous. I'm saying that the "follow orders, no matter what they are" rule is harder to enforce, which calls for, apparently, less intelligent people.

If you have a better explanation for why the police force won't accept smart people, I'd like to hear it, because their reason (which is, according to Kasic, "The theory that those who scored too high could get bored with police work and leave soon after undergoing costly training") is weak, unsupported and probably made up. "The theory" and "could" are hardly evidence.

"If a person consistently reads and advocates the views expressed in a civilian publication, he may be a civilian."


Your point? I'm saying that they failed to stop and consider that their enemy, who is a threat to their life and needs to be shot, just might be an unarmed civilian.
EmperorPalpatine
offline
EmperorPalpatine
9,410 posts
2,680

They have still been trained through boot camp to obey orders.

That's also what police training is for. If the NG handles smart people just fine, why can't cops?

for one, it has a multitude of divisions and some require higher intelligence

Detectives generally require a better mental ability.

A more intelligent man would be less likely to go over and beat him to death.

Are you implying that the police acted correctly? Keep them stupid so they kill innocent people more frequently?

I'm saying that the "follow orders, no matter what they are" rule is harder to enforce

Were they ordered to say "You see my fists? They're getting ready to **** you up."?

I'm saying that they failed to stop and consider that their enemy, who is a threat to their life and needs to be shot, just might be an unarmed civilian.

Why would you not want someone with better discernment? The military also trains soldiers to quickly react to a multitude of situations, with and without threats. Do you not get that it's a problem when cops don't know the difference?
MattEmAngel
offline
MattEmAngel
7,744 posts
4,340

That's also what police training is for. If the NG handles smart people just fine, why can't cops?


Great question. I don't know why. Ask the New York 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals.

Detectives generally require a better mental ability.


The court ruling said nothing about detectives.

Are you implying that the police acted correctly? Keep them stupid so they kill innocent people more frequently?


I'd prefer if they didn't kill innocent people at all.

Were they ordered to say "You see my fists? They're getting ready to **** you up."?


I don't believe so. Why would it matter? I didn't say they were ordered to kill an innocent person, and yet the police in the Kelly Thomas case were acquitted. Who is to say they weren't ordered to take matters into their own hands?

Why would you not want someone with better discernment? The military also trains soldiers to quickly react to a multitude of situations, with and without threats. Do you not get that it's a problem when cops don't know the difference?


Perhaps you misunderstand. I think the IQ restriction is one of the most idiotic things I have ever heard of in the police system. I am struggling to find a plausible explanation for it rather than to defend its existence. The best explanation I can come up with is that New York wants less intelligent men on their force so they can get away with bullying the population into obedience, rather than risk a more intelligent man deciding to opt out of punching a disabled man to death.

Again, if you have a better explanation for why the police force won't accept smart people, I'd like to hear it (outside of NY's current bullcrap excuse of them possibly getting bored and leaving the force).
Getoffmydangle
offline
Getoffmydangle
152 posts
2,995

@Kasic

"The theory that those who scored too high could get bored with police work and leave soon after undergoing costly training."


Just playing devil's advocate, is it possible that they have data to support this theory? Or maybe that is expecting too much for bureaucrats.
Showing 46-52 of 52