• remer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    39
    ·
    10 days ago

    These people have such an oversimplified view of the world that there’s no reasoning with them. They can’t comprehend that people would join law enforcement for any other reason than denying people civil rights.

    • SquirtleHermit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 days ago

      Seems like you are trying to oversimplify their world view so you don’t have to question your own.

    • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      There’s nothing wrong with wanting to be a police officer out of truly caring about and wanting to improve your community. Sadly what happens is those good meaning people are the minority and there are countless cases of them being harassed and outed, sometimes even assassinated, by the bad cops who are the majority.

      When you have an entire occupation, in every state, doing shady shit, killing bystanders, killing innocents, even killing the people they were sent to help, it is a huge problem that can not be ignored. They act without consequences and it needs to stop.

      Good cops are awesome. I love good cops. I wish them the best and hope they make it home safe.

      • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 days ago

        If you want to truly care and help people, be a firefighter. Be a medic. Get into the mental health industry. Feed people. Teach. Build. There are near infinite ways to help people, that don’t involve walking around the city dressed, literally, to kill.

        Violent crimes consistently trend down. We actually don’t have too many people randomly killing others. When we do, it’s a big fucking event, that could have probably been avoided entirely with some more of those mental health people I mentioned before. BEST case, a cop does something after blood has been spilled.

        At best a cop thinks they want to help people, and thinks the best way to do that is with violence.

    • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      10 days ago

      Bizarre.

      The fact that anyone can say “all” this is that speaks to such a misunderstanding of their reality.

      It’s like choosing to refuse certain lengths of the spectrum. How many years are they going to force themselves to live colorblind?

        • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          10 days ago

          anyone that can say “all” this is that about a non- identical group of anything “all” of them obviously cannot be the same.

          “All dogs are dangerous”

          “All houses are safe”

          “All birds are real”

          Using “all blah are bloo” to describe a complex group of anything and their necessarily complex associations between and outside of each other belies such a fundamental misunderstanding and incomprehension of the world you live in and the topic you’re talking about.

          • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            10 days ago

            An important thing to remember with something like ACAB is, even if it’s not literally ALL cops are bastards, it loses its bite if it’s anything else. When we say ALL cops are bastards, we serve to remind the people who already at least partially buy into this belief that it doesn’t really matter about the individual. It’s about the institution. Anyone party to that institution is part of the problem, even if they’re a generally decent person who, in a particular situation, did something commendable.

            As far as getting the people who don’t already buy in to buy in? Well,that’s what these kinds of discussions are for. No motto easy to turn into a soundbyte is going to change too many minds, they’re more rallying calls.

            Further, unlike the other examples, “cop” isn’t a fundamental aspect of their existence. Any cop, right now, can stop being a cop. I have no problem throwing shade at something someone can change. Dogs can’t not be dogs. Birds can’t not be birds. Houses… well, they could be something else with a lot of effort, but it’s fundamentally different.

            • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              10 days ago

              Interesting that at the exact point your examples break down, the contradicting evidence to your point becomes fundamentally “different” and you just dismiss it.

              Besides, don’t you know the animorphs? Birds can change into humans, andalites, tons of stuff.

              Back to your point: a slogan does not gain validity or credibility by being false; it loses its validity and credibility by being fundamentally false.

              You see that slogan as particularly important because you’ve used it before and because it’s popular.

              That does not make it a good or correct slogan.

              It just makes the person saying it look like they’re spouting gibberish since there are so many simple examples that prove it incorrect, many of those examples displayed in these threads given by the people myopically chanting that acab is valid.

              I agree these discussions are important, but what hope do you have of influencing other perspective when your argument is, at its foundation, flawed and clearly incorrect.

              Black Lives Matter? Undeniable.

              Of course they matter.

              All Cops Are Bastards?

              Objectively false schoolyard taunt.

              That backfiring banner is working against your point and against your credibility.

              • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                10 days ago

                I dismissed houses because they’re inanimate objects that we can literally break down and turn into something else. That thing would no longer be a house. And, if I DID think all houses were inherently safe, then that change would mean that I no longer think it’s a fundamentally safe thing. There’s no gotcha here.

                I’m tired of the rest of this conversation, we’re clearly at foundational differences in our world views.

                • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  10 days ago

                  Are you tired of thinking of all of the synonyms for a house that prove your first paragraph incorrect?

                  Our “foundational difference” relies on you actively ignoring the world around you and insisting that all humans are the same no matter what, and if they get a tattoo or hold open a door then they are no longer a human.

                  Not a strong or defensible foundation for your worldview.