This is a concept I can personally attest was taught to my generation. Can't say for sure if it still is.
Another was separation of powers but that was slightly bastardized as church and state.
I found a page with a history of the Minneapolis Police that if correct has some rather disturbing insights into where humanity was and how little we've moved but how much effort has gone into making us think otherwise
It's suggested that Minneapolis created the school liaison officer program and together with other programs like model community and community outreach the goal was fascism which is my word for it.
Stated goal was using education and appearance to community to shape the community into citizens that would obey police rule. In any other light I think this would be seen as a hostile takeover
Because they're not so much elected as they are hired and from what I've seen of history in three decades plus of being alive most of the time they can shoot you and expect paid leave.
We have a non-elected force with almost absolute power and very little fear of repercussions for any actions or inactions.
No as I'm not a part of that group I can't tell you what they are but it's well known that within any organization there are usually rules written or otherwise. What I'm saying is it's unlikely they are completely ruleless within. That said the public has very little influence or even awareness of this level of power granted.
I don't think we should have a world where an officer has to hang on there every word in fear
But that concept of checks and balances should definitely be strengthened and applied to this massive force with nearly unlimited power.
Minneapolis police again according to that site so I'll link it but take it with the proverbial grain..
Have fought every attempt at a review board by civilians.
The concept of checks and balances today we would know it as external oversight. You can argue that we have civil court for that. Except especially in Minnesota there's something known as civil asset forfeiture. The Minnesota laws are pretty bad about it. What I mean by that is technically you don't even have to be charged with the crime for police to seize your assets. You can then get them back if you have the means knowledge and time to jump the hoops file the right paperwork and possibly attend the court case.
How is this related?
With the system currently like this how the hell do you think you're getting to civil court if they don't want you to?
Logically the only way to have both justice and law enforcement requires an automatic external review board.
An audit of police actions
This will never be more true than in states like Minnesota where civil asset forfeiture laws are this bad because like I said if you can have everything taken to a level you're unlikely to be able to make it to a court Good luck using that for justice
disturbing trend I see is people think well those people must have been doing something wrong anyway. Which I think is probably grown out of people not realizing that what they're doing is actually processing that reality might create the terror of well if that can happen to them am I safe? That's one of several possibilities there I'm not suggesting it's what's on everyone's mind. I'm sure some people probably have agreements or alliances we don't know about and are none of our business but probably keep them safe. Or they would hope they would. I'm not even against that per se.
What I am against which seem to be a legally codified system where it doesn't matter how hard you run yourself out or what path you follow you can get slapped down and told to start over. Even while the system that claims to be about protecting you is overlooking continued slapping or attempted murder in my case.
It's against everything we know about psychology. If there's no way to turn it's a state of terror.
The problem this hole in the legal system creates is
if someone gets a hard-on for you or if misdeeds by a force with almost ultimate power end up putting them in a position where you making court would be possible liability
There's no incentive to protect you and that might not be by any of your own actions
At the moment the Constitution of the United States would seemed to suggest selective enforcement is no bueno especially on a per-party basis or repetitive basis. The 14th amendment section 1 is what I'm referring to.
I think a very simple solution is an external review organization that audits police actions.
In states where there's a clear separation between the sheriff and the police they might be a bit better off at least you have somewhere else to turn even if they're technically equal power level. In Minnesota at least in Minneapolis from what I experienced trying to call the number on the sheriff's website ended up connecting me to dispatch and then to the police
It might have been Canadian but I've also come across some rather disturbing training material. The nationality probably doesn't matter as much as you think. Given this is the age of international corporations. What's odd is I found it by searching John Locke and the social contract. I ended up on a PowerPoint intended for training police either there was a degree required or it was just for the hired force I know in Minnesota you have to have a degree. We should probably consider a psych eval as well. If you think that sounds crazy stop and realize military members have to pass one why are we not doing it for domestic enforcers?
Training material first explained the social contract and then just attempted to say it's totally normal that the poor will be disadvantaged by the system. I hope that's not being used here.
Especially because in my experience the police will not act with my identity being screwed with as in financial documents my signature my mail my physical ID stolen
so it really doesn't matter how much money you have Don't have how hard you worked
Because if these crimes are allowed to continue with the blind eye turned having money is only as useful as having it when needed and if someone can do these things it's really easy to leave you without money.
What's worse is it's well known the banks want to go cashless by 2020 so good luck storing the greenbacks in your secret location once that becomes a thing
I really hope it's not a hostile takeover by subversive means. I can't see enough to say I believe that myself but it is a possibility
Again at the moment I don't see why anyone would protest this it's in line with the principles this country was founded on
They were still teaching that judge jury and potential executioner should all be different parties when I was in school separation of powers
When the police can leave you on the street and continue to ignore crimes they're pretty much playing judge jury and executioner
If no one is there to externally review and audit their actions what hoped you have in this situation?
We focus on what black lives matter appears to be about just brutality and I'm not sure whether to believe the media or not generally I'm suspicious of corporate media. Not in a paranoid sense.In the sense that polarization and dramatization is a known way to attract and retain viewership. Which is required for advertising dollars to finance the news. It also has this apparent effect of making sure radicals are portrayed as normal and or the heads of organizations
So I take it with a grain of salt but it would appear much of that movement is only focused on police brutality and only for one race
So admitting I could be wrong I don't think they will accomplish much because even if you get small changes and/or the outcome they hope for if it doesn't include protection against some of what I've mentioned you just go from immediate death to prolonged suffering and starvation
But hey I'm a white guy, I'm the problem right? I don't get to suffer and I can't be property even as someone who steals felony amounts from me claims to own me while the police look the other way.