I was going to post this as a comment, but it was in an anarchism community, and I figured some sections of it might be unacceptable there. Hence, new post.
Here’s a guideline of how to interact with cops. There are more or less three modes, depending on your read of the situation. Cops are not always the enemy or the maniacal whole-job-is-making-evil thugs that Lemmy sometimes makes them out to be. It really is bad for people to get mugged or their cars broken into, and they’re the solution our society has come up with to minimize the amount of it that happens. It’s not always a bad thing.
If you find yourself talking to the cops, there are more or less three ways:
- They’re there to solve a real problem. Someone’s car got broken into, someone got beat up. Just talk with them. Tell them what you know, help them figure out the situation. In almost all of the US, their effect on the problem will be positive, and it’ll be a lot more positive if they have a good grasp of what happened. If, in your opinion, the person they’re trying to catch really did do something that warrants a law enforcement response, then give them a hand. Use your judgement as to whether that’s warranted of course, and your impression of the justice level in your local area, since it varies quite a lot in the US.
- They’re there for you. Shut the fuck up. Don’t say a goddamned word. It doesn’t even matter if you didn’t do it. Don’t explain. Shut the fuck up. Be polite, obey lawful orders, definitely don’t fight them or you’ll get a felony and might also get injured or worse, but tell them that if you’re suspected of a crime, then you’d like to talk to a lawyer, and you have nothing else to say. And then, shut the fuck up and cooperate. Maybe you want to go as far as “Were you shoplifting?” “What? No. That wasn’t me, man.” But any further explanation than that, just leave it alone. Definitely don’t make something up on the spot, to make yourself sound innocent, if you did do it. For the love of God, don’t do that.
- They’re there for someone who didn’t do anything wrong. The reason for this post is, anything and everything with ICE and immigration falls into this category. Some things with local cops will, also. Just be unhelpful and simple. No, I didn’t see anything. I don’t know. I’m not sure. Be vague. Don’t get creative, keep it simple, don’t refuse to give your ID or otherwise antagonize them or commit minor crimes of obstruction, but just do your best imitation of someone who just fell from the sky. “So you’ve NEVER MET your neighbor. Your neighbor across the hall.” “Nope.” “Are you sure?” “Yeah, I don’t know.” “I mean, she gave us your name, she said she’d talked to you.” “I don’t know, I don’t remember that.” Don’t embellish. Don’t explain why. Just calmly let the silence linger and the pressure build up, without adding extra words.
Like I said, everything with ICE or other immigration authorities falls into the third category. No exceptions. Everything. The same applies with any type of federal law enforcement, I suspect, for the next few years.
Why not post to a cop forum “how to deal with the people you have to deal with.” ?
Because most of us haven’t taken classes about the book “On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society” while most US cops have.
Why not post to a cop forum “how to deal with the people you have to deal with.” ?
I think the George Floyd protests accomplished a pretty large amount of this. Prior to about 2014, the state of policing in the US had some absolutely fatal flaws. No pun intended. Now, training on use of force is totally different, bodycams are pretty much universal, a lot of stuff has changed.
There’s actually still more that is needed, and a lot in our criminal justice system that still needs improvement, but the cops’ part of the equation has actually had some of the most attention to it recently, so it’s in the best shape, relatively speaking. The court system and the prisons are where a lot of attention needs to go, now.
most US cops have
This is absolutely false. Tell me which classes, and what their enrollment numbers are. There are a little over a million cops in the US.
Also, never answer the question, “Do you know why I pulled you over?” with anything that sounds like an admission. They’re fishing and looking to have you confess to a traffic violation.
The honest answer is “No, I’m not sure why you pulled me over,” because it’s true. There are a million motivations they might have come up with to pull you over, and you’re neither psychic or telepathic.
This is absolutely shit advice.
You are not obligated to talk to the police. The 25 word script:
- “Why did you pull me over?”
- “I’m not discussing my day.
- “Am I being detained or am I free to go?”
If you are being detained, invoke the 5th amendment.
“Why did you pull me over?”
“Sir, we’re here because your house was robbed.”
“I’m not discussing my day”
“So you can’t tell me what was stolen and don’t want a police report for your insurance?”
“Am I being detained or am I free to go?”
“You’re in your house, sir.”
I literally posted a link to a video which recommends your 25-word script, down below.
Not every interaction with the police is a traffic stop. Honestly, most traffic stops involve citations that are so trivial that it barely matters what you do, as long as you can manage not to get yanked out of the car for refusing to ID or something. This is talking about a lot more serious situations that don’t have a one-size-fits-all answer to them.
Edit: Added “most.” Sometimes, depending on what you’ve got in the car, the 25-word script is absolutely pretty fucking critical to stick to.
This is talking about a lot more serious situations that don’t have a one-size-fits-all answer to them.
DON’T FUCKING TALK TO THE POLICE! YOU DON’T HAVE ANY OBLIGATION TO TALK TO THEM.
Just take the fucking L man. You’re trying to justify to people that it’s okay to talk to the police and there is literally no fucking reason to talk to them.
It is not your job to solve their crimes
It’s not your job to make their job easier
It’s not your job to make sure they have the right person
Your statements, however innocent you think they are, can and will be used against you. Doesn’t matter if you’re a witness, an innocent bystander, or criminal.
They are not your friend.
All cops are bastards. Full stop.
I’m in the acab camp, but I’m going to disagree with you. If I’m in a shooting incident and I know who did it and they’re on the run, I’m gonna tell the cops what I know. It’s mostly black and white, but there are the exceptions.
I definitely feel like “It’s not your job to make sure they have the right person” deserves some followup questions lol.
Thank you, agree on all points
So I was driving, late at night, and I saw a heated argument between a man and a woman.
I slowed down, sort of checking if everything was okay. Just then, he punched her in the face, pretty hard.
She fell and crumpled up on the sidewalk in a ball, I jerked my car over to the side of the road, popped out and ran over yelling. The guy turned around to me, and for some reason charged at me while I was still running at him. We collided, fell over on the asphalt together, shit was on, we fought for a little bit. Finally he turned around and just ran away. I called 911, and went over to the girl, who was still crumpled up. Her purse had fallen down and open, with her shit all scattered everywhere, and as I was going over she sort of started gathering up her stuff. I sort of knelt down, still talking to the dispatcher, and tried to tell her to relax, and she started yelling at me to hang up, I didn’t know what I was doing, she didn’t need the cops.
Fuck that, man. For one thing, they’re already on the way at this point, all me hanging up is going to do is get them here faster if anything. She finished gathering up her stuff, and also fled the area.
When the cops arrived, they were sort of darting around trying to find the guy, it took a little while before someone had time to come over and talk to me. They basically just told me to stay put. When someone had time to talk with me, they took my whole statement and sent me on my way. In the morning, a detective called me and filled me in: They’d caught up with him, but they couldn’t find her, and without a victim they couldn’t really charge him with anything. However, he did assault the police officers, just as he had both the girl and me, and so they had him on plenty of stuff. The detective asked if I wanted to press charges, I said no, and then I hesitated and asked if it was useful for me to press charges, if they wanted more stuff to get him on. The guy laughed and said, “Oh, no. We got him.” Okay, sure, if it’s purely up to me and my convenience, then I don’t care. Anyway, presumably, he got in some trouble. I am 100% on Team Cop as far as that interaction. To be honest, I also simply don’t give a shit if the girl feels her life would be impacted by this douchebag getting convicted of the crimes he committed. He also attacked me when all I was doing was running over.
Another time, my roommate was having a mental health crisis and called the cops to take her to the hospital. We saw them out in the yard with flashlights, interacted with them, they came in, she was really badly embarrassed because she was wanting them to come to the back door so we wouldn’t need to know about it. Honestly, it’s whatever. Anyway, they took her to the hospital. Nobody shot the dog, or her.
Another time, my family member died, and we called the cops to go to her place to check because we hadn’t heard from her. They found her there, let us know what was going on, handled the body and all.
Another time was another boy and girl fight. He was grabbing her arm and not letting her go, she was asking me for help, I had a pretty heated conversation with the guy and called the cops after, and they set her up with a women’s shelter until she could figure out what she wanted to do.
Another time, a homeless guy was yelling on the sidewalk at the top of his lungs and the cops got him to calm down and leave, somehow without slamming him on the concrete or taking him away for anything.
I’ve seen cops abuse their power. I’ve had friends who’ve been roughed up by the cops. I’m not saying policing is perfect, and definitely not in the United States. But, that being said:
DIFFERENT SITUATIONS ARE DIFFERENT AND NEED DIFFERENT RESPONSES
NOT EVERY COP IS THE FUCKING ENEMY
Do not talk to the police.
Maybe you want to go as far as “Were you shoplifting?” “What? No. That wasn’t me, man.” … do your best imitation of someone who just fell from the sky. “So you’ve NEVER MET your neighbor. Your neighbor across the hall.” “Nope.” “Are you sure?” “Yeah, I don’t know.”
Wrong.
Don’t tell the cops “I don’t know” or “I didn’t see anything,” or anything of that ilk. Don’t try to plead innocence. Don’t try to use logic. It will only ever work against you, and it will never work in your favor. Always always always always.
Just tell them you exercise your right to be silent. Over and over again, if necessary. That is all you say. Be a broken record. There is no situation where you are actually obligated (in the US) to answer any type of questions for any type of law enforcement, at any time, for any reason, ever. That’s all you need to tell them. You don’t answer questions. You don’t answer why you don’t answer questions.
This is because you can also be prosecuted for lying to them, and their grounds for accusing you of lying can be pretty shaky but you still might get convicted. You can’t be prosecuted for saying nothing.
Note that this will not prevent them from lying to you, which is legal, and making spurious threats of arrest or similar to attempt to intimidate you into complying. Be aware that this is automatically bullshit. At worst the can hold you for up to 48 hours (-ish, state laws vary on that point somewhat) without charging you with anything and even if they do, you still don’t have to say anything to them.
If this happens, lawyer up immediately. You can sue them afterwards if it comes about that they violated any of your civil rights in the process.
In light of all of the above, I don’t deal with the police at all.
Name and if necessary, driver’s license. That’s it. That’s all I’m legally obligated to provide in my state, and even then only in specific circumstances. If they’re on my actual property they can pack sand; No warrant, interaction. I won’t talk to them, I won’t even answer the door. If they want to try to bust in illegally, what happens after that is on them.
I will further never, ever call the police for any reason. They simply can’t be trusted. If I have a problem with someone or something, I will solve it myself. The cops in my area have near as makes no difference to a 0% clearance rate for nuisance crimes, assault/battery, thefts, and burglaries anyway. Unless you need a report for insurance purposes it’s useless, and at that rate I’ll have my attorney call them on my behalf. They are not in the business of helping you. So don’t even expect that they will.
TL;DR: Don’t talk to the police.
“What day is it? IT’S SHUT THE FUCK UP FRIDAY!”
I am so happy to see this. I posted one of the videos below.
It is always Friday.
This is correct answer, never speak to the police. They can and will use anything you say and try to make you guilty of SOMETHING.
…And even if you are not the perpetrator, that doesn’t matter. The police are pressured to arrest somebody. At the end of the day it really doesn’t matter to them who it is, and the perp got a way while in the meantime you’re standing right here. It’s much easier to harass you.
Do you have warrants? Are you sure? Do you have parking tickets? Is your name similar to someone else they want for something else? Do they smell weed? Are you black? Etc., etc., etc.
It’s not worth it. Don’t interact.
And even if you are not the perpetrator, that doesn’t matter. The police are pressured to arrest somebody.
This part, I definitely know is wrong. Some cops do have a particular stick up their ass about liking to arrest people for marginal reasons. The majority of cops, in any given interaction, dislike arresting people, because it’s paperwork, and they get paid the same either way. They’re not looking to arrest some random person if they can’t find the actual perpetrator. With very rare and corrupt exceptions, it’ll wind up being a massive waste of resources when they have to be released, or go to trial and get off because there is literally 0 evidence, and if someone shows a consistent pattern of that, it’ll be a problem.
Is your name similar to someone else they want for something else?
I used to think that you lived in a part of the US where the cops are bad, and we mostly just have a difference of experience. That still might be true, but I more strongly suspect now that you’re basing this on not much more than your particular set of prejudice.
basing this on not much more than your particular set of prejudice.
Wow, just like the police! What a coincidence.
I agree with this. In the US you can only be compelled to answer questions if you are given immunity, which will almost never happen.
You don’t actually have the right to remain silent as pertains to other people’s crimes. You could be compelled to testify, if it comes to that, and in theory you could be prosecuted if you lie, although it’s very unlikely to happen.
There are situations where what you’re saying is accurate: Every single cop who might answer the call for service is the enemy, or you might get a really bad outcome for “snitching,” or simply stonewalling with mild hostility is better for some reason than “I don’t know her.” My advice was general advice for most of the US, not applicable to every situation someone might find themselves in.
You can be subpoenaed to testify in court. You cannot be compelled to talk to the police.
Correct. I was mostly responding to your use of “right to remain silent” when asked about your neighbors. It just doesn’t work that way. You could go with “I don’t want to tell you” or “I don’t have to tell you,” but if you had to pick one general answer to recommend, I’m a lot more comfortable going with “I don’t know” or “I don’t remember” instead of those options.
There is no US law requiring you to talk to cops. About crimes you might have committed or witnessed. You could be forced to testify in court but never to a police officer.
Completely correct. I was mostly just responding to the use of the phrase “right to remain silent” about someone else’s crimes. Using legal terminology wrongly with the cops is a bad idea.
usa sounds like a nightmare
Wrong.
Everyone thinks they have rights until there’s a gun in their face.
When the fascists knock on your door you do what you must to survive and never throw anyone else under the bus.
In that scenario, my people have an ancient and traditional saying:
It is on, son.
I had police called on me once. I was working for a homeowner while they were out of the country, and one of their neighbors called the police to report me being in the homeowners backyard.
I was watering their plants, by the way. But their neighbors might not have known or seen that since the backyard is behind the house and a fence.
Anyways, police showed up and took a few steps up the driveway to the side of the house where I was working and asked me if I was the homeowner. I politely said “No, I am not the homeowner.” The officer gave me a look, to which I elaborated “I work for the homeowner, they are currently on vacation in [country name], and they asked me to water their plants for them.” I was holding the water hose in my hand and the plants were wet on the side of the house he could see.
He was also polite, asked me for my ID which I presented, he took a picture of it on his phone and then took some notes. He asked me to hang out around the front of the home a bit because I think he may have been relaying information to dispatch, but then he came back and shook my hand and said “Thank you for being cooperative, I was on a call with the dispatch who told me the person who reported you said the homeowner was on vacation in [country name]. I don’t want to take any more of your time, but hope you have a nice day and I already let dispatch know if anyone else calls about it to let them know you work for the homeowner.” And that was that.
Be polite and respectful. Don’t lie or be untruthful. You might not like the police, but they are still humans, treat them like humans. Purposefully making their job harder will never, ever end well for you.
Every citizen can choose for themselves if they wish to remain silent, and if you choose to do so you must say specifically that you exercise your right to remain silent. If you have to speak to the police for whatever reason after you said you exercise your right to remain silent, you are legally obligated to say you will continue to exercise your right to remain silent if you choose to continue to do so.
I have had exactly this type of experience, of being calm and straight with the cops, and they clearly really appreciate it in exactly the way you described because so much of their day consists of people who are acting like maniacs or lying through their teeth.
The one part I would take some exception to is “don’t be untruthful.” If you’re guilty, then, I mean, definitely don’t lie to make yourself innocent, but there’s a big myth that cops like to promulgate that when you’re guilty then you just need to be honest and they’ll be able to help you out. This is wrong, wrong, wronger than wrong. Just ask for a lawyer.
But yes, being cordial with them while still protecting your rights will mean they’ll generally do what they can to help you out in turn, and make your interaction a lot more better, absolutely.
If you are guilty of a crime, then certainly being truthful and cooperative with police can lead the Judge to be more lenient with sentencing than if you had been a problem. It also can directly lead to you being treated less roughly (or “normally”) by police, and less additional charges ontop of your existing charge. Obviously it depends on the severity of the crime, but it is not entirely a myth. Judges usually have within their discretion a range of time for sentencing, and I have seen multiple times where a Judge takes the Defendant’s cooperation and truthfulness into account, giving the lowest possible sentencing.
My personal opinion is to just be truthful and own your actions. Be accountable. If you broke the law you broke the law, you know? Yes, a lawyer can help lower your sentence, and its really never advisable to not speak to a lawyer, but its just my opinion of “If you cannot do the time, then do not do the crime.” Yes, sometimes following the law can be a hassle, and yes there are laws I think are stupid and I do not agree with. But they are still the laws of the land and if I want to live here, then I am obligated to follow the law to the best of my ability.
THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVISE BY THE WAY
Be polite, be respectful. Kinda like bees. If you don’t mess with them, usually the bees aren’t going to mess with you. If you don’t give police a reason to interact with you, unless you were a witness to a crime or something they will usually leave you alone, where I live at least. I am over 30 and that is the only interaction with police I have ever had where I would consider myself as a suspect. Also, I feel obligated to mention that I am a Mexican American, and a legal citizen.
Yeah. They’re dangerous to interact with, because a part of their job is to fuck up people’s lives in certain circumstances. If you’re in the role of “the guy we’re trying to put in prison,” then they are absolutely your adversary, and you need to recognize that even if they’re pretending to be nice to you or seemingly being reasonable. But not every interaction involves them being the adversary, and except for individual ones who are pieces of shit (which does happen, just like with every other class of human being), they don’t need to be the enemy.
There’s a really big problem with this guidance. You may be in category 2 (i.e. a suspect) and not know it. They may also retroactively place you in that category, and everything you said can now be incriminating evidence
Bad advice
Don’t talk to cops unless you are legally obligated to do so. Depending on the state you may have to identify yourself, and in some locations and contexts provide identification. You should know your local laws. In my state it is not required even if detained although in practice refusal to identify just means you aren’t going home for a looooong time. You do have to give your license if you’re stopped while driving, of course, but you do not have to answer any other questions other than signing the citation. The aclu has a website clearly outlining what you are required to do in each state including wallet sized cards with the information
Real police advice: if they’re giving you shit shut the fuck up. If they’re arresting you just go with it. You aren’t going to win. They’re going to call in 900 back up units and 2 helicopters with thermal imaging and a tank to track you because they’re basically an army now. The more you resist the more likely you die and become a sad headline that people post and forget about in 20 minutes. They aren’t trained to take you down safely. They aren’t trained to de escalate. They aren’t trained to control their anger. They will often get furious if you resist their authority and take out that aggression on you with extreme violence. They will slam you to the ground, choke you, punch you, beat you with their knock off tonfa, taze you repeatedly, and restrain you in ways that are dangerous and restrict your breathing. They will outright ignore you if you plead for help or become unresponsive. They will let you die, wait 5-10 minutes despite being on camera, then call for medical who will take another 10 minutes to respond to your long dead corpse that could’ve possibly been resuscitated 15 minutes ago if they hadn’t stood around doing nothing like ghouls. They have 0 serious repercussions for this behavior, at worst they’ll get shuffled around
Let them arrest you, shut the fuck up, and fight it in court. Unfortunately you will need resources to do this and pretty substantial ones. I just hired a lawyer to process documents for a subpoena against a client in my healthcare practice. It was a fairly simple case of document review and it cost $2300. Probably took him 45 minutes of actual work, if that. The system is unfair and rigged against you.
Real real police advice as a result: avoid them at all costs.
You covered scenario 2 in detail, yes. If someone steals my car, and they go to talk to my neighbor and he says “I don’t answer questions. Am I being detained?”, then fuck my neighbor, as far as I’m concerned.
Fuck your car, the cops aren’t gonna find it. They’re there to write a police report so you can get an insurance claim.
The only way they recover your stolen car is if the person who stole it joyrides it and abandons it. Your neighbors testimony isn’t helpful in this scenario
If your car was desirable and actually stolen for parts or to be resold it’s long gone and the cops will do absolutely nothing
Similarly if your home was burglarized. Look at the statistics of solve rates for these crimes in your city. If they’re anything like mine they are shockingly low and the only reason they aren’t 0 is because of literal happenstance like the above scenario and not actual “detective work”
However, your neighbor opening their door for the cops does create a host of potential issues for your neighbor. Perhaps they have drug paraphernalia in plain sight in their living room? Now the cops have probable cause to search their home without a warrant because you think those noble officers are going to search high and low for your shitty car (they aren’t). Or they’re an illegal immigrant, the cops are racist, and see an in to send ins later that day. Or your neighbor is rude and standoffish, escalates things with the cop (who are known for their expert de escalation skills) and then ends up getting arrested for “obstruction”
The cops should have thought of that before they started abusing their authority and needlessly victimizing people. If they didn’t act the way they do, people would trust them enough to talk to them.
Don’t hate the players, hate the game.
Pro tip: They’re not going to find your car anyway, and even if they do the only reason was because whoever stole it abandoned it somewhere after wrecking it. In my area they take about 4 to 24 hours to even show up for such calls, so for this example the chances of them actually catching the perp in the act and getting your car back before it’s trashed are zero.
I’m just picturing you saying all of this to me while I’m over at your door, explaining that my car got stolen and asking you for access to the security cams or something, and then listening to this whole spiel about how you refuse to cooperate with any type of police investigation, with a pained look on my face, and then saying “Jesus Christ, never mind” and leaving.
I and people I know have interacted in many different types of scenarios with the police in the US. Not every situation and person fits neatly into the fun emotionally satisfying stereotypes that are your favorite stereotypes through which to view the world.
Do you know what? I helped the cops once with some security camera footage many years ago, for something that didn’t involve me.
You want to know what I got in return? I got subpoenaed, and this turned into the state jerking me around on the trial date when I was supposed to show up with the dates changing after the fact without them informing me, but every single letter they sent me started in its opening paragraph with a threat to prosecute me if I did not instantly comply.
So yeah, I don’t “help” the police anymore. They can fuck off and come back after they learn to do better.
If you want the footage, that’s different. But if they cops come to talk to me about it (or anything else) they ain’t getting nothing.
It depends on what they were trying to prosecute. If someone got murdered, and your security footage was relevant and they needed your participation in the trial to help put the guy away, and your only takeaway from it was “How the fuck DARE they interfere with my busy life for this bullshit,” then I think you need to re-think about it.
If it was drug charges or some similar crap, then yes, you probably should have made them subpoena the footage or something. But weren’t you just upset that the cops weren’t enthusiastic enough about trying to prosecute people who did something wrong?
Do you happen to know what the charge was they were trying to get the person on? Presumably you do, if you testified.
I did not testify because the accused took a plea deal, which the state kindly did not inform me of (although they wasted in total about $4 in postage threatening to arrest me for no reason) until the day of the trial after it had been rescheduled for the fourth time. The charges were indeed dumb shit. Nobody got murdered.
It has nothing to do with my busy life, it has to do with not enabling bad behavior from the police and state. The police demand respect but give none in return. You do you, but that doesn’t fly on my doorstep.
I will not be bullied. By anyone.
If the charges were dumb shit, why did you decide to help the cops with your security camera footage?
It sounds, looking over these comments, like a lot of Lemmy lives in some kind of locality where there is never an actual crime to be addressed, and the only reason someone might ever call 911 and the cops come out is… well, I don’t know, I guess the cops just ride around just fucking with innocent people full time for no actual reason. I’m sure there are places like that, but I definitely do not live in one.
Something for everyone: keep your license and registration/insurance in your sun visor, keep a state ID on you for ID purposes. Also keep your hands on the wheel until they are at the window. That and keeping the information in the sun visor ensure that your hands are in plain view the entire time. You don’t have to suddenly start moving and digging around in a dark compartment. Police officers are trained to keep their eyes on your hands and if they can’t see your hands they get nervous and that’s when bad police officers start pulling guns and shooting people. Sounds stupid but it’s what they’re trained to do. Following this simple and straightforward advice will immediately de-escalate and improve your interaction with anybody pulling you over. I’ve actually had officers mention it after a stop and thank me for keeping my hands in plain view etc. The vast majority are just trying to do their job, and this advice makes it easier for them, makes them less fearful, makes them less prone to do something stupid.
I actually got that advice in a very nice concealed carry class I went to. A large portion of the multi-day class went over interactions with law enforcements what to do what not to do etc.
This is incredibly solid advice. Whether you’re dealing with a perfectly reasonable police officer, or Shooty McSettlementByTheCity, it will be to your benefit to be cool with them and respect their desire to get through the interaction smoothly, and not have to be nervous about what you’re doing.
I can summarize three of my last four encounters with law enforcement thusly:
1: “Hey stay where you are” “Sure” (talks to me briefly, gets on his radio, verifies I’m not the guy, okay cool you’re free to go)
2 and 3: I actually was guilty of something minor, and the cop knew it, but because I was aboveboard with him and didn’t make bullshit when I could have, he went pretty much to the limit of his ability to not get me in trouble for it. THIS IS NOT TO SAY YOU SHOULD BE HONEST WITH THE COPS. Just don’t be a dick and make everyone’s day more difficult, is what I’m saying.
Also, be white. It helps a lot.
sticking to “am i being detained” and “lawyer” works wonders got out a fucked situation with the first. Genuinely the biggest gang in the US, treat them as such
Terrible advice. Please, check this guide from Projet Évasions (PDF warning) instead.
Cops are not always the enemy or the maniacal whole-job-is-making-evil thugs that Lemmy sometimes makes them out to be.
Yes, they literally are. All cops are bastards, always, everywhere, forever, no exceptions, no matter what they are currently doing or have done prior, and capitalism is always evil, so their whole job is in fact making evil, and anytime they do something beneficial is an accident. If a person puts on that uniform, they’re a worthless piece of shit. End of story. Individual cops can stop being pieces of shit by burning the uniform and trying to fix the lives they have broken.
It really is bad for people to get mugged or their cars broken into, and they’re the solution our society has come up with to minimize the amount of it that happens. It’s not always a bad thing.
Emphases mine. I’ll take them one by one:
- Cops were and are imposed on us by the capitalist class. Any consent ever expressed for these monsters has been beaten into us by generations of police violence and then solidified by propaganda.
- That is not their purpose. Their purpose is to maintain order for capitalism. Historically, modern police forces descended from slave-catching patrols. In interrogations specifically, their purpose is to gather information to build up a case file. The presence of police does not deter crime, and the deterrence of crime is only a pretext for the police to do what they’re actually paid to do.
- Interacting with cops is always an immediate personal danger, especially after you have been hurt or are vulnerable, because they are unhinged monsters who will send you to the morgue if you make them too uncomfortable. You might decide to make that choice to interact with them to prevent some greater evil, for example being courteous during a traffic stop to prevent the cops from detaining you for being suspicious. But at the end of the day, we must recognize that any interaction with the cops is always treacherous.
If you find yourself talking to the cops, there are more or less three ways:
They’re there to solve a real problem.
No they aren’t, they’re there to enforce the will of the capitalist class. Practically , they’re there because they either think they witnessed a violation of the law, or because someone called them. Rarely do they even attempt to solve problem, and in the rarer circumstance that individual cops do solve a problem, it is because they betrayed their actual function as cops.
Someone’s car got broken into, someone got beat up. Just talk with them. Tell them what you know, help them figure out the situation.
No you fucking don’t, because that cop will likely use your evidence to go after someone who didn’t do it. They don’t stop crime, they don’t solve crimes, they only provide information to the judges and terrorize the streets while doing it. Don’t help the cops with property crimes.
In almost all of the US, their effect on the problem will be positive
Use your judgement as to whether that’s warranted of course, and your impression of the justice level in your local area, since it varies quite a lot in the US.
Don’t use your judgement, use the judgement of the victims! If they don’t want the cops involved, then they don’t get involved and that should be the end of the discussion.
The same applies with any type of federal law enforcement, I suspect, for the next few years.
It has applied for the entire existence of the modern police, and it will continue to apply as long as police exist. The guide I linked was written in 2022. Yes, we need to hammer this point over and over and over until people understand that no administration, even the so-called lesser-evil party, will ever be on their side except perhaps by accident.
I was going to post this as a comment, but it was in an anarchism community, and I figured some sections of it might be unacceptable there.
Rightly so, because it’s terrible advice and it’s clear to me that you haven’t sought out any wisdom from the community. What you should have done was asked for critique. We would have loved to talk about this in more detail on any anarchist forum.
In my view, it is so much more important to listen to people as an anarchist (or any kind of revolutionary) than it is to spout off my views, hence why I don’t really post that often. Even this comment I expect and hope to get torn to shreds in the hope of improving the quality of my understanding of the world. So next time, please actually solicit the advice of your comrades before making statements, and in general do some research before making posts like these. Hence why I have started this comment with a link to a guide solicited from a group of anarchists.
No they aren’t, they’re there to enforce the will of the capitalist class. Practically , they’re there because they either think they witnessed a violation of the law, or because someone called them. Rarely do they even attempt to solve problem, and in the rarer circumstance that individual cops do solve a problem, it is because they betrayed their actual function as cops.
I had an interaction with the cops this week. They solved our problem when someone else had completely failed, even though it was that other person’s job. I’m actually just about to call the precinct and talk to them again about it, because we still have some questions.
You are mistaking your ideology for reality. You don’t need to learn anything, or test any assumptions, because your ideology already gave you the answer and your emotional conviction lets you know that it’s right. That’s a dangerous mistake.
Rightly so, because it’s terrible advice and it’s clear to me that you haven’t sought out any wisdom from the community. What you should have done was asked for critique. We would have loved to talk about this in more detail on any anarchist forum.
No, you would have loved to give me “the answer,” using the model that everything I think is stupid and everything you think is right and can’t be questioned. I’ll pass.
No, you would have loved to give me “the answer,” using the model that everything I think is stupid and everything you think is right and can’t be questioned. I’ll pass.
*sigh* No I wouldn’t have, no I don’t think that everything you think is stupid, and I most certainly do not think that everything I think is right and can’t be questioned. In fact, I rewrote my reply several times because I wanted to critique my own beliefs before I posted it. And I indicated in my reply that I desperately want my response to be torn apart to improve my understanding of the world. The guide I posted is not the answer, but I do believe it is a good one.
And I’m sorry if anarchists have treated you like that. I desperately want you to contribute to the discussion, because you probably have some experience to offer that can add some subtlety to the discussion. But a discussion goes both ways. Even on Lemmy.world, there are about a dozen people telling you that their experience contradicts your advice. It at least calls for some thought.
You are mistaking your ideology for reality. You don’t need to learn anything, or test any assumptions, because your ideology already gave you the answer and your emotional conviction lets you know that it’s right. That’s a dangerous mistake.
Isn’t this the exact kind of thing you just accused anarchists of doing to you? You’re dismissing my experience, and frankly the experience of almost every single other commenter here, as mere “ideology”. This so-called anti-police “ideology” (really “sentiment”) is the distilled experience of thousands of anarchists and millions of working people of all stripes. Please at least listen to it. I can’t and don’t want to force you to internalize it, but please at least listen. Listening is what separates a shitty anarchist from a good one.
I had an interaction with the cops this week. They solved our problem when someone else had completely failed, even though it was that other person’s job. I’m actually just about to call the precinct and talk to them again about it, because we still have some questions.
That genuinely sucks, and I hope it works out for you. The point I’m trying to make is that, as far as the function of the police are concerned, your positive experience is an accident. It is not designed to help you.
No I wouldn’t have, no I don’t think that everything you think is stupid, and I most certainly do not think that everything I think is right and can’t be questioned. In fact, I rewrote my reply several times because I wanted to critique my own beliefs before I posted it. And I indicated in my reply that I desperately want my response to be torn apart to improve my understanding of the world. The guide I posted is not the answer, but I do believe it is a good one.
Okay, sure. I’m happy to have this conversation with you, but you have to realize that you wrote me an initial message with “All cops are bastards, always, everywhere, forever, no exceptions” “a worthless piece of shit.” “No they aren’t” “No you fucking don’t” “it’s terrible advice” and so on. I read your initial paragraph and didn’t see anything even remotely resembling “this is why” or where logically your argument came from. It was just “research” from your “comrades,” which makes it sound like only comrades can come up with truth, and anyone else needs to learn from them before “spouting off.” You literally said at one point “don’t use your judgement.”
The cops in most cities are organized by the city council and the mayor. “Capitalism” has nothing to do with it, except indirectly, because it takes money and connections to get on city council. There are a lot of places where people through the exercise of their democracy, reduced the funding for the police, instituted other programs like social workers going to some calls, got the police force out of doing traffic enforcement, basically, doing reforms. If the whole city council tried to disband the police completely, and just have an anarchist city, they would probably lose their election because the people of the city wouldn’t like that idea. But there is not some other entity that’s coming from outside and “enforcing” the police on the people of the city. It’s just the city government, which is our system, is changeable by a majority of the people every few years, if enough people can get on board for it.
I’m not trying to say it is easy to fight against the network of people who operate city government, or that it doesn’t take money or anything like that. But plenty of places, some reformer has run a campaign and then won and then done reform. We still use voting. It’s not like some Amazon warehouse where the “owners” run the city and make there be police, and there’s nothing the people in the city can do about it.
Doesn’t that make sense? Does it seem accurate as far as a critique of what you said about how inescapable the police that are enacted on our cities, apparently, are, and how there is no consent by the people of the city? You tell me. I’m picking out just that one part to respond to, because you said you were open to critique and conversation. So sure, we can talk about it, I usually like talking.
Part 2
It was just “research” from your “comrades,” which makes it sound like only comrades can come up with truth, and anyone else needs to learn from them before “spouting off.” You literally said at one point “don’t use your judgement.”
I want to expand a bit on the “don’t use your judgement” point. A better way to say that would have been: “defer your judgement to that of the victim.” Choosing to defer your judgement to someone else is still a judgement call. And in the case where you are the victim, this collapses into making the judgement call for yourself.
And the reason I said that is because if the victim does not want the cops involved, then the cops should not get involved, period. I don’t see this as controversial, even if the cops weren’t the baddies. But since they are, bringing them in where they’re not welcome is a recipe for violence and further arrests.
I will admit that I typically give my comrades’ views the most weight, but I absolutely do listen to non-anarchists. Actually, that’s one of the reasons I have a SDF account: because almost no one is defederated from us, and we don’t block anyone (I think), so at least as far as Lemmy is concerned, I get stuff from lemmy.world and other non-anarchist instances and people on Lemmy. And for my news digest, I actually just compare several mainstream and independent media sources and try to “estimate” the story from the “corrupted signal” I get from taking all those sources.
I think you are mischaracterizing how insular the anarchist movement actually is.
The cops in most cities are organized by the city council and the mayor. “Capitalism” has nothing to do with it, except indirectly, because it takes money and connections to get on city council.
The phrase “except indirectly” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here! Capitalism has an absolutely enormous but indirect effect on local politics. You can buy a politician’s loyalty for shockingly little, so little that even local businesses can do it for local politicians.
There are a lot of places where people through the exercise of their democracy, reduced the funding for the police, instituted other programs like social workers going to some calls, got the police force out of doing traffic enforcement, basically, doing reforms.
And where have those reforms gotten us? Every single time the reformers say they’re going to do some reform, then it gets watered down, and eventually the cops somehow get extra money, extra training, and nothing changes. Supplementary to the discussion above, this is why we need to abolish the police.
If the whole city council tried to disband the police completely, and just have an anarchist city, they would probably lose their election because the people of the city wouldn’t like that idea.
I don’t agree with you here. I think that, if we actually disbanded the police, people would be happier. Also, I’m not interested in winning elections. I’m interested in bringing power to the people.
But there is not some other entity that’s coming from outside and “enforcing” the police on the people of the city. It’s just the city government, which is our system, is changeable by a majority of the people every few years, if enough people can get on board for it.
It is absolutely not our system. In my case, the municipal government is the local branch of the state government, which is itself subordinate to the federal government. And at all levels, the people with the money are the ones that pull the strings. If push comes to shove and it’s the will of the people vs the will of the higher levels of government, the will of the government usually wins, and the will of the most powerful local capitalist will win every time (because states amplify the political power of those who are wealthy enough to prop them up).
It’s not like some Amazon warehouse where the “owners” run the city and make there be police, and there’s nothing the people in the city can do about it.
I would argue that this basically is the reality of the situation, and that the voting is just to make the smallest of changes. (“If voting changed anything, they would make it illegal.” I would like to offer a corollary: if a possibility is so impactful that it would actually disrupt the capitalist order, it will never be put up for a vote, because the government gets to decide what gets voted on, and the politicians are indirectly controlled by the capitalists.) Like with police interrogations, voting is not an equal interaction between the government and its subjects. The government has all the power, and that power is controlled by the capitalist class.
No offense, but I think you might misunderstand some core principles of contemporary anarchist philosophy, like how capitalism and politics are intertwined, and that might be why you’re not getting a warm reception amongst anarchists. I definitely recommend you check out Section D.2 of the Anarchist FAQ, and skim the rest of Section D. (Yes there’s a holy-shitload of reading for anarchists 😆. I can probably find you a YouTube or audiobook version if you’re not in the mood to do all that reading.)
Tl;Dr please read the PDF I linked. It will explain how interrogations work a lot better than I am capable of. And it won’t yell at you.
Part 1
I read your initial paragraph and didn’t see anything even remotely resembling “this is why” or where logically your argument came from.
To be honest, I thought we were on the same page about the cops being baddies, but on different pages about what to do about it, especially since you said you were looking to post in an anarchist community.
you have to realize that you wrote me an initial message with “All cops are bastards, always, everywhere, forever, no exceptions” “a worthless piece of shit.” “No they aren’t” “No you fucking don’t” “it’s terrible advice” and so on.
Yes, there was lots of swearing. That does not diminish my point. In fact, it enhances it, because it increases the chance of it being understood by the widest possible audience, and it underscores the importance of the message. It also forces the reader to practice confronting their beliefs, which in the real world are going to resemble my first post more than a perfectly typed theoretical tome.
I.e., just because someone is yelling at me doesn’t mean that what they’re saying is wrong. And this is something that really takes practice, to learn to listen even when someone is being up in your face, because I might just be “that wrong” or even stepping on someone’s toes in a way I don’t understand. For this reason, I really appreciate contemporary anarchist essays for being upfront and confrontational.
Let’s take these one at a time.
All cops are bastards, always, everywhere, forever, no exceptions
If you want, replace “bastards” with “baddies” and this is exactly what I want to communicate.
Why are cops ever the baddies? Because
- They enforce the will of the capitalist class. More plainly: they work for the rich; your interests come last. In the United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the cops do not have to “protect and serve.” Even if they are taken at their word, even the pretext of law enforcement, namely to enforce the law as it is written, gives away the game: they enforce the law as it is written without regard for the ethics or effects of those laws.
- The few times that ordinary people do benefit from police interactions, these are not part of the function of the system. For example, sometimes cops will “not see something” if they’re trying to be nice. For example, if a homeless person is living under the overpass, an individual police officer might decide to leave the homeless person alone instead of giving them a ticket for loitering. Now in my view, this is, morally, the absolute bare minimum. But from the perspective of the police department, this is a (small) dereliction of duty, because the homeless person can be found to be breaking the law, yet the officer refused to enforce the law.
- The proof is in my personal experience, the experiences of everyone I’ve ever known, the people to whom I have listened to (comrades or otherwise!), my experience following the news daily (usually NOT from anarchist or even anarchist-sympathetic sources!), all the statistics about police I have ever seen, all the true crime slop I’ve watched, hell even C.O.P.S. made the cops look bad to me, and all the books and articles I have ever read on the topic. And look at what the cops openly and proudly focus on: harassing the homeless, prosecuting drug addicts, harassing sex workers, deporting migrants, silencing protests. And that’s just what they’ll brag about.
Why are the cops everywhere baddies? Because they are baddies in every country, because all states exist to prop up the interests of the locally powerful people, and the police serve the interests of their local state. This is, in my view, a fundamental pillar of contemporary anarchist thought, and I can refer you to literature for a better justification if needed.
Why are cops always baddies? Because being a police officer is defined by membership in a police department, because the powers and protections police officers get are at least mostly effective as long as the officer is in good standing with a police department, including when off-duty.
Why are cops forever baddies? Because:
- At some point, they did not exist. But if they never existed and someone created them right this very second, I would still be able to argue based on the cops’ own stated purpose that they are the baddies.
- When they were created, they were branched out from slave-catching patrols. Slave- catching is evil because it violates the principle of autonomy, which is again a pillar of anarchist philosophy. So they started off evil.
- As modern policing grew into what it is today, the blatant disregard for autonomy has not really improved, as evidenced by the existence of prisons, jails, and police killings. So in the recent past and present, police have been evil. This is supplementary to the discussion above.
- If we keep doing policing like we do now, then it would still be an evil institution. But if we changed it, then the change would really have to be so drastic that it would simply be something else entirely, because the police are such a fractally evil organization.
Why are there no exceptions? Because cops are a subset of the set of baddies, and this is because, as discussed above, cops are evil because their function is evil. So the only way for a cop to stop being evil on account of being a cop is to stop being a cop. And when individual police officers do something good, they do it in spite of being a cop, often in flagrant dereliction of their duty to uphold the law as it is written.
“a worthless piece of shit.”
I very carefully worded that to make it clear that I am calling the police worthless pieces of shit.
Which I am. And they are. They’re actually a lot worse than shit, because shit can be useful as fertilizer. The police, on the other hand, keep our species from reaching its full potential.
“No they aren’t”
Yes, that’s one of the points I want to make. That was in response to “(The police are) there to solve real problems.” My issue really was with the word solve. In case it was unclear: yes, the problems are real, and i do not mean to trivialize them. Furthermore, their pretext for being there will likely be to solve the problem. But they are not there to solve the problem. Solving the problem is a pretext for reestablishing control of the situation in a way that is palatable to their paymasters. In rare cases, for example stopping serial killers (which, from watching hundreds of true crime documentaries, which are notoriously pro-police: they are terrible at doing!), these interests line up with the interests of the people, but considering how many people have their lives ruined or ended by police for property crimes, crimes of poverty, drug crimes, antisocial crimes (i.e. pissing in the street), it is clear to me that this is the exception rather than the norm. That’s what I desperately need to communicate.
“No you fucking don’t”
This was in response to the bit about talking with the police. In the guide I linked, there is a huge section about how the police ask you all sorts of innocent, easy questions to butter you up for hard ones. You really should not talk to the police almost ever. Talking to the police is not a equal exchange. The cops have all the power, and they will use whatever psychological and physical means that they can to fill up their case files.
Saying “no you fucking don’t” was crucial to demonstrate how seriously dangerous a choice that is to make. If I had said “no you don’t”, that would have betrayed how important this point is.
“it’s terrible advice”
Again, that’s the point I wanted to make. I’m not saying that to be mean, I’m saying that because I think it needs to be said. If you told me “you should plug your fork into the outlet” with complete sincerity, I would tell you “that’s a terrible idea, don’t do that” because following that advice could be fatal. I would rather see you alive and upset at me than dead by listening to terrible advice. And then once the fork is down, I will gladly infodump about why it is a terrible idea to fuck with electricity. But in that moment, I need you to put the fork down. Similarly, I need you to not collaborate with the cops in the future. Lives are at stake. At least after whatever incident you’re going through in the present moment since I acknowledge it might be too difficult to reverse course.
Another helpful phrase: “Am I being charged with a crime or am I free to go?”
Another YSK post only applicable for US citizens?
Hm. In the US, that would be alright except when he refused to tell them who he was. That can get you arrested. I get how “I don’t answer questions” is good just because it’s specific enough that you can stick to it when shit’s getting a little bit real, but it also doesn’t really apply to all questions or all situations.
Here’s a defense law office giving their abbreviated take on it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqo5RYOp4nQ
They have a longer one, where they told a story of an illegal dispensary that got raided. Two employees tried to explain their way out of it. A third employee just shut the fuck up. The first two got charges, because their attempt to talk their way out of it confirmed that they were working there as employees. The third guy, nobody could prove a damn thing about why he was there. Was he a customer? An employee? Had he wandered in to use the bathroom? Nobody knows. And so, he was free to wander on his merry way, while the other two had some minor but not real enjoyable charges to deal with.
Shut the fuck up.
You are not required to identify yourself if you are not operating a motor vehicle (in which case you must supply your license if asked) and you have not been accused of any specific crime. “Being suspicious” or “fitting a description” or “we got a call” is not a specific crime. If there is not reasonable suspicion that you were the one who committed an articulable crime, you don’t have to provide your name.
Read up on your state’s laws. If your state is not a “stop and identify” state you don’t even have to identify yourself if you have been accused of a crime. That’s for the police to figure out themselves if they care so damn much. You invoke the 5th.
In this guy’s case (I don’t know what to make of the accents or the checkboard hats or the Astra, so I suspect this is not meant to be happening in the USA, but whatever) he is on his own property, has not been shown a warrant, and has not been accused of a crime. He doesn’t have to state anything. If he is not required to interact with these police at all. He’s not even obligated to open the door. If these cops had a single pinky toe to stand on, they’d have shown up with a warrant.
You are not required to identify yourself if you are not operating a motor vehicle (in which case you must supply your license if asked) and you have not been accused of any specific crime. “Being suspicious” or “fitting a description” or “we got a call” is not a specific crime. If there is not reasonable suspicion that you were the one who committed an articulable crime, you don’t have to provide your name.
This is completely accurate. I should have said, it’s a little bit unclear from the video, but it sounds like they suspect Ray Whoever of a crime, which is why I was saying it that way. But if he was just some random person, he’d be completely within his rights to refuse to ID himself, which is a very important clarification.
This is a good overview:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_identify_statutes
I didn’t even know that there were states which were not “stop and identify” states, I just learned something today. I still don’t completely get it… the article says that, in practice, you can be arrested for obstruction anyway if you don’t identify yourself, even without the statute, or maybe you can’t. It says the California ACLU recommends that people identify themselves regardless, since they may be arrested for it, even though the arrest will be illegal.
In the US, that would be alright except when he refused to tell them who he was.
More generally, this depends heavily on the details of the interaction, and the US state where the interaction was taking place.
In the “I don’t answer questions” clip, if it were in the US, the police probably did have enough to arrest the guy, however “The court also held that the Fifth Amendment could allow a suspect to refuse to give the suspect’s name if he or she articulated a reasonable belief that giving the name could be incriminating.” Since the officers were asking for a specifically named person, it might be within the guy’s 5th Amendment rights to refuse to identify himself. Would his not identifying himself as the person they were looking for make it so they couldn’t (shouldn’t) arrest him? Possibly, since they’re looking for someone with a specific name, and they don’t know that that guy is named that.
Of course, you might beat the rap, but you can’t beat the ride.
“The court also held that the Fifth Amendment could allow a suspect to refuse to give the suspect’s name if he or she articulated a reasonable belief that giving the name could be incriminating.” Since the officers were asking for a specifically named person, it might be within the guy’s 5th Amendment rights to refuse to identify himself. Would his not identifying himself as the person they were looking for make it so they couldn’t (shouldn’t) arrest him? Possibly, since they’re looking for someone with a specific name
This is some of the worst and wrongest legal advice I have ever heard. No, that’s not how it works.
There are situations where you don’t have to identify yourself. If you’re just standing around, and they’re curious, then you can tell them to get lost and they can’t have your ID. However, if the cops have a reason to suspect you specifically of a crime, even a slight suspicion, then you have to identify yourself, in all 50 states. You will not only get the ride, you will get misdemeanor charges.
This is what SCOTUS found:
“The court also held that the Fifth Amendment could allow a suspect to refuse to give the suspect’s name if he or she articulated a reasonable belief that giving the name could be incriminating.”
In the situation that played out in the clip, had that been in the US,
… it might be within the guy’s 5th Amendment rights to refuse to identify himself.
The court upheld Hiibel’s conviction. The part you’re quoting is in the part where they left open the possibility that there could be some crazy type of circumstances where revealing your name could, itself, form a link in a chain of evidence that the cops needed in order to convict you of some other different crime.
There is not, that I know of, any person ever in the United States who has ever been found innocent of failure to ID, or had their conviction overturned for some other crime or something, under the logic you’re saying. It was just a side note while they convicted the guy. Do you know of someone who’s ever gotten off due to this logic?
I said “might.” Not “would.”
You also said, “Since the officers were asking for a specifically named person, it might be within the guy’s 5th Amendment rights to refuse to identify himself. Would his not identifying himself as the person they were looking for make it so they couldn’t (shouldn’t) arrest him? Possibly.”
That “possibly” should have been written as “Absolutely the fuck not, and it would in all likelihood get him additional charges on top of what they were already arresting him for.” That’s why I said it was terrible advice.
