thorbotI choose you, Squirtle!
NX2Source?
“I made it the fuck up!”
citation needed
Betch
PizzasgoodTLDR, during a 1983? survey of 728 officers and 479 police spouses, "Approximately, 40 percent said that in the last six months prior to the survey they had behaved violently towards their spouse or children."
hauiThe interesting part is that nobody reacts to this. Just hours ago they were screaming fake and then, nothin. No rebuttal, no evidence to the contrary. I‘m not saying it must be true then but I am upset by the harshness of the first reactions and none to the sources.
This isn’t a rebuttal, I don’t have one, but some nuance I hope is appreciated.
I looked at the studies a while back and read some discussions on the validity of them. I’ll summarize what I recall. many people were misrepresenting them quite a bit. The people quoting this number often aim to shed cops in a bad light and will do so intentionally.
If I recall, 40% is the domestic violence coming from either member in the household. Not just the police officer.
Another thing was what the offers reported as violence. if I recall correctly “violence” could be defined as raising your voice to behaving violently. So I suppose that leaves room for some interpretation. But when the numbers are brought up, the claim is generally “40% of cops are wife beaters”.
Lastly, these were studies from the 90s and the researcherd generally did their studies on a single urban police departments. So old data and not representative sample.
I don’t trust the number at all with the data we have. The actual rate could be higher or lower, we need better data.
My memory could also be way off.
I agree fully that the numbers can very well be off.
In science, you need to prove a theory multiple times for it to become valid. Indicators like this dont mean a lot. But they do not mean nothing either.
So saying „40% of cops are wife beaters“ is as wrong as „thats bullshit“. Neither side knows really but one has at least some data which we should check.
Funkytom467Well i disagree, “that’s bullshit” doesn’t just apply to something false but also to anything not proven.
Because saying a number implies it comes from a correct calculation based on valid data. So if your data is old, not statistically significant, or/and not relevant, it’s just a opinion, not information. It’s bullshitting…
So, saying we have 8 billion people in the world is bullshit because its not accurate?
It is assumed it’s a approximation based on the real number that we all know comes from a trustworthy source. The number is common knowledge, unlike a lot of other statistics.
The real number can be approximated to some extent, using good data and calculations. Any lack of accuracy after that expose our lack of knowledge, saying we have the exact number to one human would be bullshit for exemple.
You see how your precious comment just evaporated, right?
No explain that to me?
Probably the part that bothers me is that there haven’t been any follow ups to the study; we have better tools and a better understanding of abuse and the effects.
We could do this same study way better now and at a much larger scale to ensure a better picture of the issue (smaller deviation from the norm, higher certainty in the figures). Yet, it hasn’t been done.
I’m wondering if everyone is afraid of being targeted by the police if such a study is done and potentially getting harassed for it, or if the police departments are actively refusing to participate in such a study, or if they think the number is lower, so the older study is more damning? So they don’t want to do a new one for fear that the number will go down?
I have no idea, those are just some thoughts off the top of my head.
I don’t know either way what a new version of the same study would say. Part of me wants to see it be higher to give better reasoning to restructure the police, part of me wants to believe it’s not that bad and the number is lower… But honestly, I don’t really have any horse in the race… I just want the numbers to be reflective of actual, and current facts.
Thats pretty much what I‘m thinking as well. Including the undecidedness. I still think such issues should be dealt with.
amniotic druidAnd that bulbasaur is the best
NelotsAs we all know, you gotta pick #1 to be #1.
Bulbasaur #1
KolliAhh the famous 40%.
Much as I loathe cops, I’m surprised this BS still passes muster. Y’all can believe a poorly written, self-reported study from decades ago. I guess if it fits the narrative, it must be true. Kinda like how conservative memes work.
Surprised this has been downvoted and reported until mods were forced to remove it to appease the hive.
It’s upvoted now. But yeah, the mods around here (not this place, lemmy in general) are barely better than reddit mods. If the post challenges the narrative, out it goes.
Nah. It’s just as bad here. Try speaking out against Marxism/communism/Socialism. You’ll get downvoted to oblivion, reported, and possibly banned depending on where you post.
Yes, everyone just likes using an old study. It’s certainly not because data on police misconduct is basically impossible to collate, or that cops are very rarely prosecuted for any crimes they commit and so there’s no public record of their misconduct.
fivethirtyeight.com/…/why-its-still-so-rare-for-p…
Note how even this article ends with a law professor who was former police saying that law enforcement doesn’t work on cops, so we need “alternative means” of punishing them. The cops are a protection racket and a gang, and former cops still hold the blue line. One apparently can’t even write an article in America critical of the police without softballing the solution.
Your post has nothing to do with mine. Let me spell it out: ACAB. And I’m quite certain I’ve suffered at their hands more than you. Bet money.
Police need to use something similar to the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) that the military abides by. This article eloquently explains this better than I can.
"If we are willing to provide military equipment and training to our local law enforcement, let us also share their higher standards of behavior with police. "
It’s a culture war son, it’s total war but spelt different.
Pretty much. “memes” like these are quite a turn down for lemmy meme group.
Dr. CoomerIf the atf were in Pokémon, which Pokémon would they kill like dogs?
VulKendovHoundour
Growlithe, he’s breathing fire!