submission and punishment

[Ken]

The problem is that a lot of police departments now don't release body cam footage or admit that they even have it. So relying on police to provide video documentation of interactions with the public may be less than ideal. Especially in cases where there is any question about police misconduct.

A FOIA request clears that up - or discovery in a lawsuit. There are a bunch of YouTubers, TikTokers, etc. who make a business out of this. They demand footage of police encounters and then post it on their channel and get lots of views. The police departments don't really like it, but there's nothing they can to do stop it.

I suggest you read this Pro Public article published just last week which goes into great detail about how police departments around the country are obstructing release of body cam footage. Lawsuits by TikTok-ers notwithstanding. For example, from the article: https://www.propublica.org/article/how- ... dy-cameras

For a snapshot of disclosure practices across the country, we conducted a review of civilians killed by police officers in June 2022, roughly a decade after the first body cameras were rolled out. We counted 79 killings in which there was body-worn-camera footage. A year and a half later, the police have released footage in just 33 cases — or about 42%.

and

A Department of Justice report from this summer found that the secrecy and impunity was all part of a larger pattern in the Minneapolis Police Department. Shootings, beatings and other abuse had routinely been captured on video. But the department didn’t make the footage public or mete out punishment.

There was a similar dynamic in Memphis, Tennessee, where officers in a street-crimes unit regularly abused residents. They wore body cameras but faced no consequences until the case of Tyre Nichols, who was beaten to death this January by officers in the unit, attracted national attention. The footage showed that some of the officers took their cameras off. Others knew they were being recorded and pummeled Nichols anyway. It was only after public outcry that the department took the rare step of releasing footage, which contradicted initial police accounts and led to state and federal charges for five officers.

Some politicians have often quietly enabled obstacles to this kind of accountability. When South Carolina became the first state in the nation to require the use of cameras in 2015, Nikki Haley, the governor at the time, made the announcement with the family of Walter Scott standing behind her. Scott was a Black man who, two months earlier, was stopped by the police for a broken taillight and was shot in the back and killed when he tried to run away. A witness filmed the shooting, and that video contradicted official police accounts.

“This is going to make sure Walter Scott did not die without us realizing that we have a problem,” Haley said as she signed the legislation. What the governor didn’t say was that the same law stipulated that footage from cameras is “not a public record subject to disclosure,” thus relieving police departments from any obligation to release it. And indeed, little footage has ever become public in South Carolina.

[Bootstrap]

It is about giving law enforcement the training and tools to interact with people in more productive ways rather than treating every encounter as a situation to be escalated.

i can agree with that.
but then, why does it seem as if it is the responsibility of the "submissive" one to be in charge of de-escalation?

Because we have bad ideas about power and authority and tend to blame the victim.

I think this is exactly right. In many threads, the emphasis is on submission, and the focus is on the person who failed to submit. For instance, some are much less likely to emphasize how bad it is to invade another country, and more likely to focus on saying the invaded country should submit. Even in cases where the police were convicted by a jury for murder or manslaughter, people can say that the real travesty of justice is that they were convicted.

To me, can sometimes look like a tendency for some people to side with power and justify power. Over and over again, we are told that the real problem is the failure to submit to abusive power. Not abusive power in the first place.

FWIW, I think we are often faced with this question: how do we, as Christians, respond to abusive power when we encounter it? That's a complicated question. I don't think the Jesus answer is to simply submit. But it isn't violence either. And I think truth-telling is part of the answer.

[Josh]

Is fleeing from a traffic stop a “failure to submit to an abusive power”?

[Ken]

Here's a guy who chose not to submit and found out

[mike]

Here's a guy who chose not to submit and found out

Crazy

[Josh]

This kind of thing is becoming really common in Houston. A section of freeway regularly gets closed for a car chase or a shootout. Carjackings are common.

Criminals carry illegal machineguns and just wildly spray gunfire, not caring about stray bullets. The police in turn look more and more like an occupying force. Home invasions happen regularly, even in wealthier areas. Citizens are desperate for a return to law and order.

[Ken]

This kind of thing is becoming really common in Houston. A section of freeway regularly gets closed for a car chase or a shootout. Carjackings are common.

Criminals carry illegal machineguns and just wildly spray gunfire, not caring about stray bullets. The police in turn look more and more like an occupying force. Home invasions happen regularly, even in wealthier areas. Citizens are desperate for a return to law and order.

Apparently this particular guy in the truck wasn't armed. He was just under the influence of some sort of drugs and refused to stop the truck or exit the vehicle.

[justme]

Over and over again, we are told that the real problem is the failure to submit to abusive power. Not abusive power in the first place.

thanks boot
i agree w you

[RZehr]

Over and over again, we are told that the real problem is the failure to submit to abusive power. Not abusive power in the first place.

Over and over again the Bible tells us to submit to those in authority. And doesn’t seem to carve out much exception when the authority is forfeited by abuses. The exception is that we ought to obey God rather than man. The exception is not, if the police doesn’t technically follow all proper protocol.

So it makes sense to me that we focus more on our responsibility than on the authorities. Besides, we don’t believe we should be in authority anyway.

[barnhart]

Over and over again, we are told that the real problem is the failure to submit to abusive power. Not abusive power in the first place.