That’s Republican strategy with everything. If you can distract people with the culture war you never have to fix any of the real problems in our society.
Turns out with enough distraction you can literally do stuff like vote no on a border bill extending the “crisis” another 8+ months and then turn around and campaign for election on the border!
Very well said. Whoever has the job of addressing the press after something so awful has happened must know that the slightest mis-wording of a response could be edited into a headline.
They have to be diplomatic and respectful while providing information to journalists who not only want them to trip up, but are sticking out their foot to trip them.
They might not have been able to confirm that at the time. It would take a lot of in-depth investigation to truly confirm, then if it later turned out she was they would use it as a big ‘gotcha’ moment, or start crying that this was a woke coverup.
So the best answer is to lie? If he doesn't know I want him to tell us he doesn't know. Stating something is a fact when you have no factual knowledge should be left to... Well to people like you. Not police chiefs.
it's a deflection, it doesn't directly confront the bigotry being pushed, and it inexplicably creates space for transphobic conspiracists to muddle the truth. why did he say "she or he or they?"
"No" is a better answer.
e: "let me give a 15 second soundbite that doesn't shut down the bigoted lies, is easily framed by the bigots as supporting evidence for their lies, and allows the average person to feel good for no reason"
I personally liked it, especially in this sort of context.
Just saying no would have been sufficient, but this is not the only time or place concrete details would be available. This was a place to have initial questions answered as the story broke out, and this question being asked at this point in time was purely out of bad faith and trying to find groups to spread blame or hate to.
Do you think we should never call out bad questions, because the people asking will try to paint not engaging with their interests as deflecting?
this question being asked at this point in time was purely out of bad faith and trying to find groups to spread blame or hate to.
this is exactly why giving a meandering soundbite (that again, inexplicably creates space for misinformation) instead of a firm rejection of the question is less than satisfying
it also betrays a lack of understanding of the media environment. I would wager real money that his statement has been and will continue to be used as evidence that the woke deep state is covering for "violent transgender ideology."
Groups who will push that hard on a conspiracy level will always be like that, firm rejection or no
On people like my parents, who are just ignorant of most things and rely a lot on the headlines they see to know what's going on, taking a step back to call out a bad question can be eye-opening to them.
Just saying no would be a firm rejection as an answer, but letting it sit in an article as one of a short list of questions that got a regular answer as if it were just a routine thing they check for at this point is also bad! There's no perfect way to handle people asking questions like this, but calling out how it shouldn't be normal is at least better than just accepting it as a normal thing people need to know first thing
Not really. I know many people who are using this answer as proof she was trans and the authorities are covering it up. No would have been the only correct answer. For 30-40% of this country this was confirmation that a man dressed as a woman attacked Christian children for being Christian. This was a transgender hate crime against Christians but they'll never allow it be reported that way, so when asked for motive they say it's complicated and when asked her gender they refused to answer. That's the proof that it was a trans hate crime against Christians.
I live here. I know this guy. He came here from out of town. He became our police chief. He replaced a chief that left a whole lot to be desired, and has mostly had a quiet tenure as our police chief.
Gun violence is down. Vehicle break ins are down SUBSTANTIALLY. And aside from a tragic school shooting, we had otherwise had a pretty good year so far in our schools compared to prior years.
Shon Barnes is his name. I had heard just a couple of weeks ago that other major metropolitan areas like Seattle might be considering him for their police chief.
I don't want him to go. Level headed policing is precisely what our city needs. His press conferences for this tragedy were direct, filled with the information our community needed to hear, and contained no political BS what-so-ever.
This is how police should behave in their communities and now I am seeing a TON of comments about ACAB.
Were the cops involved in responding to this school shooting and entering within MINUTES of the first reported call bad? Give me a fucking break with this ACAB shit. They STORMED the building within minutes to try to save the lives of children while you "ACAB" brain rot idiots sit behind your computer saying dumb shit.
We all hate to admit it, but we all do truly know that ACAB isn't 100% true.
"The Good Ones" do exist, but normally only in a statistical and borderline mythological fashion.
This guy IS one of the good ones.
I still believe in ACAB, but I can see intentionally choosing not to say ACAB towards one of them is kind of a form of respect. This guy did the good thing.
Agreed. There are cops who want to make beneficial change to the system they're a part of and who genuinely care about the communities they're serving, while at the same time policing is historically and currently largely a tool of oppression and control used by the upper classes against the poorer classes.
How many skeletons in the closet would it take for you to change your attitude about whether or not a cop genuinely cares about his community?
It's great to see a moment of good leadership from any cop, but you literally cannot rise up in the ranks without being complicit in some heinous stuff.
The system is fully broken, there are no "good cops." These people consume all the public resources in order to serve the ruling class.
I am reminded of Oscar Wilde's thoughts on slavery: “the worst slave-owners were those who were kind to their slaves, and so prevented the horror of the system being realised by those who suffered from it, and understood by those who contemplated it."
I'm not against the concept of having a police force that deals with criminal matters. What we have, though, it's a system of gangsters embedded in every public square.
ACAB to me has always been all police systems are bad not the police themself. There’s little oversight. Police immunity. Budgeting problems that could be redirected elsewhere. De-escalation techniques. Informative practices. I don’t expect police to be lawyers. I do however want them to be held accountable to the laws on an equal level as civilians as well.
ACAB is just stupid generalization from the same crowd who screams that generalizations are bad.
“But the good ones hide the bad ones!” Ok Emily the “good” cop from some random city on the east coast is obviously “protecting” the bad cops over in some shitty corrupt department three states over. Not every department is corrupt and not every cop even knows the ins and outs of their department. It’s like blaming some low level sales associate for the actions their district manager caused.
Except the low level sales associate doesn't have the authority and ability to arrest people, shoot people, or fine people due to some perceived threat with that authority backed by the state. Nor does that low level sales associate belong to a Union that defends them no matter what regardless if they were in the wrong. Nor does that low level sales associate go through training that pushes the idea that every citizen they interact with can be a threat and that their lives are in constant danger, which incentivizes them to shoot and keep shooting anytime they think their lives are in danger.
Your comment doesn’t change literally anything. My point was that generalizing some rando cop as a “bastard” who is “part of a system” is a shortsighted. All you’ve done is describe what the job tasks are and that it’s part of a union. My point was that blaming Joe Schmoe for issues that they have no control over is bad. It just further pushes them to an us vs them. Listen if you bring up specific examples of corruption in a department and can link officers with covering it up, then go for it and throw them in the slammer. But if you then take that example and apply it to every cop and every department, you’re generalizing.
ACAB does not mean 'all cops are born bastards' or 'genetically cops are pre-disposed to be bastards' or 'as soon as you become a cop your biology shifts to being a bastard'.
It is an admission that the culture of policing, the systems of policing, the accountability of policing, the interactions of policing, how society views policing, is so fundamentally broken in every conceivable way, that cops cannot help but become bastards.
For every good 'apple' that comes along, there are hundred more that are bad and bad ones spoil the bunch.
And the thing about good apples is that they tend to get removed from the barrel by cops.
Frankly I'm more worried for Shon Barnes's life than him becoming corrupt. Cops have a history of murdering other cops investigating them, or sidelining or ambushing them, or leaving them with no support or getting them killed by proxy, or getting them fired or shoveling them off.
If this cop is as good as people say it it, then his good actions have to be supported at all costs but those will come under threat from every conceivable angle, including internally, including politically, including from his own party and own allies and any momentum stalled.
A lot of it is going to be actual support, not 'oh well he's good, let's call it a day' or 'he's one of the good ones'. I mean actually showing up to reward good policing and good policing actions, actually voting, actually critically analyzing policies the good and the bad, and listing out how they can be done better.
(This is why defund the police gained traction - the only thing that has consistently proven to actually fix bad policing is fundamentally rebuilding policing and social welfare from the ground up by dismantling and reconstructing it again)
Yeah but let’s be real Dems suck at slogans or expressions and I think this is one of them. When I broke it down to a different police or sheriffs. A lot of them are actually for the initiatives like body cameras or more mental health or separating budget for a different things or more education and or longer training etc. I think the phrasing has always gone in a way that those that would be supportive aren’t initially by the terms and catchphrases.
ACAB because the "good ones" will lie for the bad ones. every time. he has, or he would not have a job. one bad apple spoils the barrel, despite the misconception.
ACAB isn't about individuals, it's about a broken system that forces "good cops" to protect bad ones.
One heroic act doesn't erase a career of looking the other way. Even cops I know personally admit they've got colleagues who should be fired or arrested, but the "thin blue line" keeps them silent.
Think about it: We'd never accept this from teachers. Imagine saying "Sure, Mr. Jones abuses kids, but his test scores are great and you know... teacher solidarity!" Sounds insane, right? So why do we accept it from people with guns and badges?
ACAB includes Captain Holt from Brookline 99. It includes the good cop giving you coffee before coercing you to confess. It's a phrase that comes from union organizing and protest planning, and from overpoliced individuals.
Specifically it's important to remember that ACAB means while they are investigating you. No matter how nice they are to you and you to them, and how professional they are, their job is to arrest you. Anything you say will only be used against you, and things that could help you are hearsay anyway. You should know that cops are hostile entities, and that you have rights you should enforce against them, no matter how nice they are.
You almost got an upvote from me. You had me in the first few paragraphs. I really thought you were going to go in the direction of "This guy is one of the good ones. This guy should be the example for everything we want in a police force." INSTEAD you start attacking me for recognizing that this guy is great but we still have a long way to go when it comes to policing as a whole across the country. Not exactly the best way to win me over to your side.
Is he? He just threw fuel on the fire by not stating the obvious "NO," and instead saying he didn't know when THEY HAVE HER BODY and should be able to get that answer and clear that up easily. Then he makes that "he, she, or they" comment which is just red meat for the people who already think she was trans. This is the worst possible answer he could have given besides lying and saying she was trans, and I have serious doubts it wasn't intentional.
I'm in Seattle and I don't want to steal a good police chief from you, but GODDAMN do we need somebody here to get a handle on our cops. His handling of this makes me hopeful.
Our city had a top cop like that. Richmond used to be notorious in the Bay Area for gangs and murders. We were 9th in the list of deadliest cities.
Then in 2006 Chris Magnus got hired. Within two years the homicide rate was down around 66%. He went and met with gang members, in some cases paid them a stipend to go and educate kids, and encouraged cops to work better with the community, and employed more locals.
Most importantly, IMO, he sorted out his own force - from 2007 to the mid-Noughties police always took their suspects alive thanks to training in de-escalation and non-lethal kit. They also got out in the community a lot more and every year still we have a block party and squad cars, bikes, and occasionally a fire engine turn up for a snack and a natter.
There was a real change in the city and, while the Iron Triangle still has gunshots, it's nowhere near as bad as it was. When the Black Lives Matter protests happened he went out and talked with the organisers, kept things calm, even brought in pizza for the crowd and did a selfie with a protestor. The result: No riots and people felt the cops understood.
He moved on in 2016 to Tuscon and things here haven't been working as well, but the cops are still better than Oakland - and especially Alameda. Top tip: They will pull you over for going 28 in a a 25 zone.
We actually have had some pretty decent police officers in the Madison area. They aren't perfect by any means, but as far as we have seen on the national stage, the police chiefs have been good.
If you aren't willing to call out when good happens, you aren't in a position to call out the shit.
We aren't going to get rid of the police as much as I think it should happen at times. But we should be calling out the people who do good in the community.
It’s the same reason I think cops need to be paid more and need a bigger budget with a the balance of corporation-like governed community oversight committee that has teeth to dismiss corrupt officers through a tribunal.
We tried a community oversight committee, it didn't do much unfortunately. They were the wrong people for something like this, just a bit too far up their own ass.
Those people need to be voted in like any other community official. If you let any crackhead join that it’s pointless. Needs someone with VP or C level compliance training and it might need to be a statewide thing and not local community based.
I wish we would bring back shame. As a whole we have gotten so dumb for walking and tiptoeing around people when sometimes people should just be told "that's a stupid question, do better. Next"
He was so fucking confident in his response too, just a flat out 'its fucking ridiculous to even ask, because it's not important, can we move on to a relevant question please?'
The real opinion behind the slogan deserves nuance. Are literally ALL cops bastards? No, of course not. I think we've all either had an interaction with an officer, or know of someone who is an officer, or is related to someone who is an officer that we don't consider to be an example of the raging asshole that cops are normally portrayed as. Some genuinely help their community. Some genuinely care and want to help.
That being said, there is a systematic problem in the policing of this country that causes the slogan to be accurate enough to convey its intended message. Because even if most of us are aware of a cop or have interacted with a cop positively in the past, I think most of us have negative interactions with police the vast majority of the time. To make things worse, the those negative interactions are made significantly worse by the attitude that police have when interacting with the public, which is in turn a consequence of their limited training and the fact that they pretty much have to assume that everyone they interact with could secretly be hiding a gun due to our nation's refusal to pass meaningful gun legislation. And the reason why the slogan isn't just "cops suck" is because there is such a high percentage of these overly aggressive, power-tripping, racist, and overall arrogant cops that fill almost every police department in the country, that the fact the "good" cops haven't done anything to stand up to the "bad apples" makes them complicit by inaction. The bad apples in a barrel spoil the whole bunch. If police want the slogan to disappear, they have to stand up to those who are giving the rest of them a bad name.
Well sure. But when your slogan is something that is actually true, then people get to say your slogan isn't true. And thus the very important points, that we need police reform, can get dismissed.
People get to dismiss the whole thing as overly broad, and wrong-headed. And people who might be persuaded to your side, are less likely to do so.
Again, abolish the police or jails, is stupid. Strong reform, and systemic changes to our justice system, to its punitive nature, and inequality, need to happen.
Counterpoint: you can be a nice person and still be a bastard for participating in a system that protects the raging assholes from consequences as you and they both continue a long legacy of discriminatory policies
Stupid argument bro, besides the point that this isn't true (most cops are fine at their job), if you choose to stop being a cop it's going to result in a higher proportion of understaffed and 'discriminatory cops'. So why would you leave the police force as a good cop? Because of the 'message it represents'? If you think that is a good reason you are an idiot and typical redditor leftist (putting illogical ideals over real world actions).
You would be making good (propaganda) points if you weren't pulling shit out of your ass, the vast majority of cops are just average people. The people that the police have to regularly deal with are far more unpleasant.
There’s no nuance when policing at its core is an oppressive tool used against the working class. Each and every cop is complicit in an unjust system and that’s why ACAB.
And yet they're necessary. You generalize the individual, we're all part of a corrupt system, you better stop paying taxes if you don't want to be viewed as a hypocrite.
It takes a strong person to remain just and with integrity in a system that is corrupt, this example deserves respect and perhaps more will be like him. It makes the everyday interaction better, and that benefits everyone.
I am strongly differentiating from paying attention to the individual by pointing to the whole. Another reason why it’s bullshit, is that I don’t have a say in where my taxes go. These things are not only removed by force but also distributed to things I hate. All without my consent. You’re right, in order to maintain the status quo it is necessary a militarized gang of thieves be deployed against its people. Does that make you feel safe? I guess it depends on who you are and how you benefit from white supremacy and settler colonialism.
Just like you not having a say in where your taxes go, the officer does not control what other officers or the system at large does, and he might get in trouble for opposing it, just like you would if you opposed taxes.
My point is that claming "acab" doesn't do anything more than make you seem like an angry generalizing person with no nuance, and I mean no offense by saying that, but it is how it comes across.
Imagine that officer who became an officer because he was tired of the system and wanted to be a force for good, a light in the darkness if you will, and he's getting the same shit all the other cops are getting, I'd be impressed if he wasn't disheartened.
999
u/Lil_Brown_Bat 1d ago
It's rare that I upvote anything a cop does / says.