Texas Teens Can't Graduate High School Until They've Been Told How To Behave Around Cops

from the HOW-NOT-TO-GET-SHOT dept

To graduate from high school in Texas, you must first be able to show you won't provoke police officers into shooting/tasing/beating you during a traffic stop. That's according to a new state law that ran through the legislature under the guise of solving police/community relationship problems. (via Popehat)

In the aftermath of several fatal police shootings of unarmed citizens, Texas lawmakers sought to pacify tensions between law enforcement and civilians. The state legislature brought civil rights groups and law enforcement organizations together to develop a solution: the Community Safety Education Act, which was signed into law last year.

The bill requires any student entering ninth grade in the 2018-2019 academic year and thereafter to participate in a class and watch a video instruction on how to interact properly with officers during traffic stops. Without a notation of attendance on their transcripts, seniors cannot receive diplomas.

To "pacify tensions" brought about by cops killing unarmed people, we're instructing teens to become docile subhumans who should only respond to the presence of law enforcement in the manner law enforcement prefers. That's the gist of the Community Safety Education Act Instructor's Guide [PDF], which not only tells people to remain suitably cowed during traffic stops, but also gets the law wrong.

The problems with the instruction manual (and the law... and required course itself...) begin at the beginning, in the "Tips for Educators." The guide says instructors should remind students of their rights, as well as warn them that exercising them could get them killed.

Students may ask about citizens videotaping traffic stops. It is a citizen's right to videotape. Drivers and passengers should be aware that unknown items in a citizen's hand may cause safety concerns for officers.

In short, it's best not to record a stop for your own personal safety because there's no telling what a professional highly-trained in law enforcement and force deployment might do if they see something in someone's hand -- even if that something is 1,000,000x more likely to be something everyone carries with them (a cellphone) than a weapon. Most people aren't going to escalate a traffic stop into a murder one charge. But that's hardly reassuring to highly-trained law enforcement officers, who are led to believe every interaction with the public carries the potential of death and destruction and respond to every movement like bunnies scattering at the sound of a stepped-on twig.

Since highly-trained law enforcement officers are completely unpredictable, it's up to Texas' education system to crank out harmless teen drivers. Hence the stupid law and the stupid course, which comes with graduation strings attached.

The "notes for drivers" says it's "recommended" officers treat drivers courteously, but there's certainly no law requiring courteous behavior, much less one that withholds a police academy diploma until would-be officers of the law complete their "Don't Be An Asshole" course.

The advice given is basically this: do everything a cop tells you unless they tell you to stop doing it or to do something else. The course says students have the right to refuse vehicle searches, but kind of portrays assertions of rights as a way to get arrested.

And the guide gets the law wrong: specifically, Texas' "failure to identify" statute. Here's what the guide says:

Although it is lawful for you to remain silent during a traffic stop, you are required by law to truthfully identify yourself when asked to do so by an officer. A driver or passenger can be arrested for giving false identifying information to an officer.

The second part is true. The first part isn't. That's OK. Texas law enforcement officers can't manage to wrap their minds around this law, so it's unsurprising a teacher's guide put together by politicians is inaccurate. The law actually says [emphasis added]:

A person commits an offense if he intentionally refuses to give his name, residence address, or date of birth to a peace officer who has lawfully arrested the person and requested the information.

A traffic stop is a detention, not an arrest. It likely makes little difference in the context of a traffic stop, where documents asked for by officers will likely identify the driver with or without their verbal input. But placing this misinformation inside a required course will likely cause students to think this applies everywhere, not just during traffic stops. It doesn't. An officer needs to arrest a person before they can legally demand identification. And officers can't use a refusal to provide identification as the basis for an arrest.

Passengers aren't required to ID themselves. They're only forbidden from providing false information -- the same as the driver. But the teacher's guide makes the same mistake again in its "Notes for passengers."

Although it is lawful for you to remain silent during a traffic stop, you are required by law to truthfully identify yourself when asked to do so by an officer.

The law does not require this. It does not require it of drivers, even though proving you can legally operate a vehicle tends to undermine any "remaining silent" about your identity. Passengers, however, have nothing to prove, so this course is telling high school students something that simply isn't true and will only contribute to Texas law enforcement's continued abuse of the statute.

It would be bad enough if the mandatory course was limited to "pacifying tensions" by implying unpredictable civilians are what really needs to be fixed. But the course goes even further by getting the law wrong. So, high school students will be forced to attend a pointless course containing misinformation to be considered educated enough to secure a diploma.


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 22 Oct 2018 @ 3:44pm

    > So, high school students will be forced to attend a pointless course containing misinformation to be considered educated enough to secure a diploma.

    And the rest will be shot.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      David, 23 Oct 2018 @ 8:03am

      Re:

      Sure. If they can't afford a diploma, they can't afford a legal defense either and are fair game. This makes sure that the cops shoot only those too poor to deserve better.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Gary (profile), 22 Oct 2018 @ 3:52pm

    Also...

    Texas is also bringing back the DARE program, abstinence-only sex ed, and a mandatory seminar about how torrenting supports terrorism!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 22 Oct 2018 @ 4:30pm

      Re: Also...

      "Texas is also bringing back the DARE program"

      So no more "ask your doctor" ads on TV then ....

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2018 @ 1:35am

      Re: Also...

      So what do they do if the police officer demands they have sex?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2018 @ 11:40am

        Re: Re: Also...

        Obviously the driver should do it because a police officer would never ever Ever do something against the law. They have to do training and know the law prior to getting a badge after all.

        Too bad we don't have a mandatory course in laws and writing laws for politicians.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 5:41am

      Re: Also...

      'Funny' thing, after reading the above article I would absolutely believe the first two, and even the third is at least feasible given there have been arguments that copyright infringement has/does support terrorists.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 22 Oct 2018 @ 3:59pm

    Bass-ackwards

    I recently read some statistics, .3% to .4% of a populations were members of the police department. These numbers, (not necessarily accurately quoted but close enough for government work) were for major urban areas, at the same time they seem reasonable for non urban, or even rural areas. And they have not been verified by me in any way, but seem believable enough.

    The thing is, if true, that means that the state legislature, certain civil rights groups, and law enforcement organizations, think that their .4% trumps our 99.6%, in the concept of who has the power. Or should have. Is it because they have guns, the power of arrest, the inculcated perspective that they will be believed over us criminals? Some other delusion?

    Curiously, those civil rights groups that participated in this quagmire might serious rethink their commitment to civil rights, unless those some other groups that were involved are just characterized as civil rights groups (maybe some law enforcement unions who are looking after the civil rights of their membership?).

    Where is the law that says law enforcement agents have to know the law in order to enforce the law? Where is the law that says law enforcement agents know what civilian rights are, and that they have to respect not just those rights but the people who have them? Where is the law that says law enforcement agents should learn how earning respect is done by giving respect upon penalty of termination due to lack of public respect?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Tin-Foil-Hat, 22 Oct 2018 @ 9:08pm

      Re: Bass-ackwards

      It doesn't matter how few there are, in a police state, the police are all that matters. A cop has jurisdiction over every second of our lives and they will push for microsecond. Then nanosecond. They dictate our education, medical care, what we can and cannot ingest and soon what mathematical formulas we're allowed to use on our devices. No intrusion will ever be too intrusive. If they can impose a law or mandate a device to limit our private thoughts they will do it.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2018 @ 6:02am

      Re: Bass-ackwards

      Thats why we have a 2nd amendment .
      Use it , don't let them take more of your rights away .

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2018 @ 6:40am

        Re: Re: Bass-ackwards

        That is some very bad advice.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        nasch (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 8:43am

        Re: Re: Bass-ackwards

        Let me just get this straight. You're advocating that if you believe a police officer is violating your rights, you should shoot them?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        R.H. (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 8:50am

        Re: Re: Bass-ackwards

        I'd hope for that to be the very last option.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2018 @ 5:25pm

          Re: Re: Re: Bass-ackwards

          I'd hope for that to be the very last option.

          Given the pay to play requirement of wide reaching political speech, outright banning discussion of certain politics by safespaces, rigging of the vote, purging of voter registries, stuffing of the courts, frequent and blatant disregard of individual rights, wide-spread never before seen surveillance, police being allowed to kill people in the streets without penalty, and now indoctrination of the innocent, just how many options do you think you have left? Assuming "bend over and take it" isn't on your list of acceptable options....

          Face it, the US that treats everyone as equals, where voting can actually make a difference, and who's government is accountable to it's citizens, only exists on paper. In reality it's no different than any other fascist state.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 22 Oct 2018 @ 4:32pm

    During their stay at the academy, do the police receive training on how to talk to people?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 22 Oct 2018 @ 4:43pm

      Re:

      Probably. But I suspect they keep it to how to achieve and maintain the 'command presence' which could be translated into 'authoritarian, I don't take no shit from anyone so don't even try it with me' which some would characterize as 'bullying in the first degree'. And they are happy with that, even when it doesn't seem to help their public perception.

      Maybe the police need a good PR firm. One of the problems with that ideas is...would they listen?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 22 Oct 2018 @ 5:27pm

        Re: Re:

        But I suspect they keep it to how to achieve and maintain the 'command presence'

        What command presence? It is more like intimidation tactics, which is very different, and much more dangerous for citizens.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 22 Oct 2018 @ 5:31pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          You missed this part:

          "...which could be translated into 'authoritarian, I don't take no shit from anyone so don't even try it with me' which some would characterize as 'bullying in the first degree'."

          I guess?

          Command presence is what they call it. What it is in action is different?

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Glenn, 22 Oct 2018 @ 4:52pm

    Right...

    "Training" for citizens instead of for police--that'll fix everything. Police "training" involves treating everyone like they're criminals, which is exactly what they believe--they just haven't found out yet which laws a person has broken. But given all of the really bad laws on the books, this is mostly true. Legislatures are trying to criminalize behavior that just about everyone engages in at one time or another.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 22 Oct 2018 @ 6:05pm

    Cops need to learn how to behave around people.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      David, 23 Oct 2018 @ 8:19am

      Re:

      That would weaken what they could make qualified immunity do. Where do we get if "I thought I was entitled to do that" is not a viable defense for a cop any more?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        That One Guy (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 8:35am

        Re: Re:

        Have a 'Sad But True'/Insightful vote.

        As for the question: On it's own, nothing beyond maybe a few wrists slapped slightly harder. Removing that as a viable defense would be a good start, but for it to matter you'd also have to have the system(legal and on the police end) change such that there was an interest in handing out actual punishment and getting rid of(rather than merely shuffling around) the supposedly 'few bad apples'.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    coynet (profile), 22 Oct 2018 @ 6:31pm

    Texas: Although it is lawful for you to remain silent during a traffic stop, you are required by law to truthfully identify yourself when asked to do so by an officer.

    Cushing: The law does not require this.

    The law may not require this. Time and again, we've seen that law officers do. If you refuse, you will be arrested.

    I understand that the law is supposed to dominate. But no one will make the officers follow this law, so the practice is the rules of the road.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Coyne Tibbets (profile), 22 Oct 2018 @ 6:40pm

      Re:

      Addendum video

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 22 Oct 2018 @ 6:55pm

      Re:

      The law is the law, and while police officers will try to stretch the law to their benefit, they must have some other reason to arrest someone in order to get the ID they wanted in the first place. Otherwise it will get tossed, and the made up reason for arrest might also get tossed.

      Now there are a lot of reasons to arrest someone, legitimate or not. Then there is the meme that 'you can beat the charge but you can't beat the ride'. Until there is sufficient feedback (officers fired and/or arrested and sent to jail for violating the law) this will continue. The problem is how to energize the feedback, without more innocent citizens being killed.

      The good cop/bad cop issue still stands. There are good cops out there, but are they good if they allow bad cops to continue their abuse? Yes there is feedback within the force, if good cops speak out they are punished. That will continue until there is some mechanism to protect good cops. That means that the higher ups need to be on the side of good cops. There is a likelihood that some bad cops have risen in rank, and will protect those below them that do not deserve protection.

      So what do we do? Fire all higher ranking cops? Fire all cops? Insert people who will tell the rest of us about the bad guys? There is a certain truth about institutional memory. Remembering how to investigate, old style, is important. Remembering how to protect those that don't conform with 'our way' is not. There needs to be a method that returns integrity to the situation. This is complicated by the number of departments across the nation. That integrity needs to be in each and every one of them. Not just one.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Dan (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 1:22am

        Re: Re:

        "...they must have some other reason to arrest someone in order to get the ID they wanted in the first place. Otherwise it will get tossed, and the made up reason for arrest might also get tossed."

        Agreed, but only after how much time and money is wasted by both the citizen and the government? The failings of the modern justice system, namely the perverse incentives for a quick guilty plea to get on with one's life, even in the face of innocence, make this point somewhat moot.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2018 @ 8:47am

        Re: Re:

        There are no good cops. If so-called Good cops are covering for bad cops, that just means they are all bad cops. It's the Thin Blue Line Gang!!! They even have their own special flag to stand apart from everyone else.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          That One Guy (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 8:55am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Not entirely true, and you undermine your case by engaging in hyperbole like that.

          There are good cops out there(offhand I can remember an article not too long ago where a a sheriff I believe actually apologized for a SWAT raid on the wrong house, one where two officers were shot even), the problem is that by the standard of 'any cop who covers for a bad cop isn't a good cop', which I also agree with, the number of 'good cops' appears to be in the minority.

          They do exist, there's just far fewer of them than there should be.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2018 @ 6:43am

      Re:

      You can beat the rap, but you can not beat the ride.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    norahc, 22 Oct 2018 @ 6:53pm

    Nothing like indoctrinating the next generation to be obedient to authorities no matter what.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 22 Oct 2018 @ 7:49pm

      Re: Nothing like indoctrinating the next generation to be obedie

      Like...always.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Uriel-238 (profile), 22 Oct 2018 @ 8:50pm

      Obedience

      Teaching obedience (and not teaching critical thinking skills) to children are part of the Texas Republican Party platform.

      Of course, the problem with an obedient soldier is that it can be anybody's obedient soldier. Those kids will make excellent nazis or excellent cultists someday.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      David, 23 Oct 2018 @ 12:18pm

      Re:

      Doesn't sound like "obedient" is the correct description since you must not follow instructions like "show me your driver's license" too fast or you'll be shot.

      It's more like how to properly deal with feral or rabid animals or kidnappers with nothing to lose.

      You need that kind of instruction in the wilderness or you might fall prey to ravaging beasts or desperate criminals.

      Or police officers.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 22 Oct 2018 @ 7:29pm

    This law would not exist if police unions were illegal

    Public employees should never be allowed to have unions. They are creating laws tailored to only protect the police at the detriment to the rest of us. They already have an unbalanced system where they are believed sometimes even when video contradicts them. If you stop a police dog from killing you, that is somehow now assault on an officer and you will be lucky if you survive the intake process.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Uriel-238 (profile), 22 Oct 2018 @ 8:53pm

      Police unions

      Considering how Trump is treating federal employees as a general group (e.g. treating them like shit), I can see the function of unions of public employees.

      However, there are limits to what unions should be able to do. I suspect we can fairly regulate unions without having to discard them altogether.

      Our teachers are desperate for stronger unions, and our police have unions that are way too strong.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2018 @ 8:51am

        Re: Police unions

        Trump is not treating federal employees like shit. What a bunch of made up crap.

        Remember the days when being a Public servant meant not all that good pay. Nothing like the private sector. But you were doing your part. Since the Unions came in, now it's far better being a GOvernment employee. Benefits up the butt. Governments going bankrupts because they just can't afford all this crap they handed out, and the taxpayers are now on the hook and screwed. That is the real problem and has nothing to do with Trump.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2018 @ 11:20am

          Re: Re: Police unions

          Governments going bankrupts because they just can't afford all this never-ending warfare.

          ftfy


          "That is the real problem and has nothing to do with Trump."

          It has everything to do with the GOP economic insanity that does not work. Everyone realizes it does makes things worse but some are too scared to open their mouths.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2018 @ 11:47am

          Re: Re: Police unions

          Yes he does treat us like crap. He just openly says how much he loves the troops.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Wendy Cockcroft, 24 Oct 2018 @ 5:59am

            Re: Re: Re: Police unions

            Unless that translates into better VA services, etc., it's just talk and talk is cheap.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 24 Oct 2018 @ 9:51am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Police unions

              I never understood why funding of the VA is separate from the military budget. The volunteer army is made many promises, how many are actually delivered?

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                nasch (profile), 24 Oct 2018 @ 11:54am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Police unions

                Some at least. I've talked to veterans who are thrilled with their free medical care. Which is not to say that is a universal experience - certainly there are some serious problems with the VA.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        btr1701 (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 1:05pm

        Re: Police unions

        > Our teachers are desperate for stronger unions

        Are you kidding me? The California Teachers Association is the most powerful union in the state (followed closely by the California Nurses Association). Every politician running for office come to them to kneel and genuflect and receive their blessing.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Uriel-238 (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 2:27pm

          The California Teachers Association

          And still they get paid a pittance comparable to the custodians that maintain the school. Teachers should be paid in the same grade as doctors, lawyers and engineers.

          We're also running out of teachers, with classroom sizes of sixty kids or more.

          In the meantime teachers are unable to live on their teaching income in other states hence the massive strikes.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            btr1701 (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 3:14pm

            Re: The California Teachers Association

            > Teachers should be paid in the same grade as doctors,
            > lawyers and engineers.

            In other words, they should have to compete and excel in their field in order to receive a high salary, rather than have government and union protectionism do it for them.

            Works for me.

            BTW, California teachers, due to the power of their union, are paid the highest salaries in the nation and you know what we the taxpayer get as a return on that investment? A rating of 47th out of 50 states in quality of education provided.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Uriel-238 (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 4:24pm

              "Highest salaries in the nation"

              Went from about mid-range to the highest. $75K as an upper end (starting is around $44K) is still pathetic considering the amount of education required for a public-school teacher. In other states, like Mississippi or Nebraska, teachers are totally screwed. Even Colorado and Arizona is in crisis.

              Couldn't find your 47-out-of-50 ranking for California. Found a questionable #36 by search which still isn't great. When I was schooled here in California, it was in the top five, and Nevadan's were doing what they could to get their students taught over here.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 24 Oct 2018 @ 3:57am

              Re: Re: The California Teachers Association

              Rather than simply looking at annual salary and proclaiming it too much, one could gain some insight by normalizing the data to take into consideration how much it takes to live in that particular location.

              Being paid the highest salary in the nation means diddly-squat if you also are living in the highest cost of living location.

              Why do you seem to just assume that teachers do not compete and excel in their field and are given protection ... ummm from what?

              Cali is 47th? I doubt that.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            btr1701 (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 3:22pm

            Re: The California Teachers Association

            > We're also running out of teachers, with classroom sizes of sixty kids or more.

            Well, as illegals continue to pour into the country by the hundreds of thousands, it's no surprise that classroom sizes have ballooned, at least here in Southern California.

            But hey, I'm told I'm an insensitive racist if I don't enthusiastically embrace the opportunity to pay for the education of the entire Western Hemisphere!

            So full steam ahead, classroom size be damned!

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Thad (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 3:27pm

              Re: Re: The California Teachers Association

              as illegals continue to pour into the country

              I'm told I'm an insensitive racist

              Can't imagine why.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 24 Oct 2018 @ 4:01am

                Re: Re: Re: The California Teachers Association

                What many fail to realize is that the US is complicit in the violence causing these migrations of victims away from the insanity.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                btr1701 (profile), 25 Oct 2018 @ 9:21pm

                Re: Re: Re: The California Teachers Association

                >> as illegals continue to pour into the country
                >> I'm told I'm an insensitive racist

                > Can't imagine why.

                LOL! So it's now racist to even acknowledge that illegals are entering the country.

                You nutjobs are essentially cartoons at this point.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • icon
                  The Wanderer (profile), 26 Oct 2018 @ 6:17am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: The California Teachers Association

                  No - I think that was a jab at your use of "illegal" as a noun. Such uses are usually short for "illegal person", which is a baseless and dangerous concept.

                  To say that something is illegal is to say that the law requires that that thing not exist.

                  The only way for a person not to exist is for that person to die.

                  Unless you're actually advocating for the death penalty for cases of illegal immigration (in which case you're an extreme outlier, or at least I hope so), what you probably actually want to have not exist is - not the person who immigrated illegally - but the person's presence in this country.

                  The presence is illegal. (And can be destroyed by expelling the person from the country.)

                  The person is not.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2018 @ 2:26pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The California Teachers Association

                    To say that something is illegal is to say that the law requires that that thing not exist.


                    Can you please explain "legally drunk?"

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    • icon
                      nasch (profile), 15 Nov 2018 @ 6:21pm

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The California Teachers Association

                      I'm not who you asked, but there is no such thing as legally drunk. That is to say, there is no degree of drunkenness that is itself against the law. What I think most people mean by "legally drunk" is "too drunk to drive legally".

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • icon
                  Uriel-238 (profile), 27 Oct 2018 @ 12:14pm

                  "Illegals...pour"

                  I think these are the terms that make it very easy to infer you are influenced by racist feelings btr1701.

                  Illegality of people is a dangerous notion and one that tends to expand outward. As we speak Trump is pushing policy regarding documented aliens and naturalized citizens, pushing the notion that they should be regarded differently than natural citizens. There's also interest in challenging the citizenship of those who were born in the US, but by those other than natural citizens. Once me make them illegal, we try to deport or repatriate them elsewhere and when that fails, well, they had this conversation already at Wansee.

                  But fixating on the illegality of persons in the US also fails to acknowledge problems with the process of legal immigration, which often involves getting into the nation first (illegally) before requesting permanent residence. With the exception of Einstein visas (for smart, talented or super-rich folk) the process in the US takes years, sometimes decades. And most people (by far) are rejected out of hand.

                  Curiously, ICE and CBP aren't harassing at all the many Russian and Ukranian illegals here in California, even when they don't speak a word of English and are part of the local criminal element. So there's some indication that ICE and CBP are both run with policies that emphasize targeting non-whites. But that has little to do with your racism, btr1701.

                  The other matter is the term pour which suggests a deluge even though the inflow of migrants into the United States is more like a trickle thanks to our extreme vetting. (Note the decades, above. A lot of that is because the US is super distrustful.)

                  Now we're imprisoning people while they wait out their decades (for seeing asylum, mind you. Opportunities to not die or become sex slaves.)

                  Now we're arresting people who's only offense is being in the US illegally (rather than focusing on felons).

                  And then our agencies and camps are dens of human atrocity.

                  In order to qualify for the pouring, I'd think we'd be making a dent in, say, the massive refugee crisis from Syria (so far our Syrians refugees are generally good people and thankful for the shit jobs they can get in the US.) Not to mention would be managing the refugees from the Americas, that US foreign policy had a direct hand in creating.

                  If immigrants were pouring in to our nation, and were getting citizenship and benefits, then we'd actually have something great to say about the United States, given that throughout human history, greatness was often shown through humanitarian, artistic or scientific works. Instead, as a nation three times richer than the rest of the planet combined, the US is very well known for refusing to clean up messes that were ours to begin with.

                  But instead, you know, prisons, crimes against humanity, cruel and unusual punishment. All that stuff.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Uriel-238 (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 4:39pm

              "Illegals pouring"

              Huh, it looks like the illegals are pouring out of California according to recent stats (which is to say the percentage of the population of California that is made up of undocumented persons is in decline).

              What's curious to me is that the US holds 75% of the world's wealth. You'd think with that, we could totally afford to provide education and food for all of the Americas, and not sweat it, and yet look at you btr1701 begrudging a tiny fraction of them some basic education.

              If that's the case, that we have more money than everyone else combined and can't afford to spare a few huddled masses yearning to breathe free some basic human provisions that we've long determined every human deserves, then that is an indictment of the culture, mores and integral character of the people of the United States. We suck.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      nasch (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 9:49am

      Re: This law would not exist if police unions were illegal

      Public employees should never be allowed to have unions.

      I would think the right of employees of the government to organize in order to bargain with that government is protected by the first amendment.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        btr1701 (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 1:09pm

        Re: Re: This law would not exist if police unions were illegal

        > I would think the right of employees of the government to
        > organize in order to bargain with that government is
        > protected by the first amendment.

        Ask the 1980s air traffic controllers how far that argument got them.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Uriel-238 (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 2:33pm

          The August 1981 PATCO strike

          Reagan, a staunch corporatist, intervened personally. It was an early demonstration that the public gets fucked if the US aristocracy and corporate sector have too much to lose.

          The public's been suffering more and more for it ever since.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            bob, 23 Oct 2018 @ 3:06pm

            Re: The August 1981 PATCO strike

            Federal unions are not allowed to strike, it's illegal. I don't know if that was established before or after the air traffic controller strike. Despite that restriction the unions still function just fine. They carry a lot of weight when it comes to the civilian population of a government organization. Sometimes too much in my opinion because They can still interfere with civilians not allowed into the union like scientists and engineers.

            One difference between the PATCO strike and your average teacher or police union strike is the impact to the functioning of the country. A teacher strike in one state doesn't bother the feds. All air traffic controllers across the country striking will be noticed and quickly squashed due to its impact on the economy, safety, and national security of the country.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              btr1701 (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 3:18pm

              Re: Re: The August 1981 PATCO strike

              > Despite that restriction the unions still function just
              > fine. They carry a lot of weight when it comes to the
              > civilian population of a government organization.

              Not hardly. Compare federal law enforcement benefits and pensions to those of just about any big city or state law enforcement.

              State and local cops have unions with teeth and they have the bennies to show for it. Federal cops have a union that can whine a lot but has no real power.

              I'm not arguing for stronger unions, mind you. I think the taxpayer is much better served with the federal model. But your claim that the federal unions carry a lot of weight is comparatively false.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2018 @ 6:38pm

                Re: Re: Re: The August 1981 PATCO strike

                Try looking at the DoD unions. They have some strength to them. Mainly in ruining better pay for other non-union employees because they want to keep it as a time in service pay raise as opposed to a pay per performance model.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          nasch (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 3:37pm

          Re: Re: Re: This law would not exist if police unions were illegal

          Ask the 1980s air traffic controllers how far that argument got them.

          As far as I know, the right to unionize never came up, only the fact that they weren't allowed to strike.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_Air_Traffic_Controllers_Organization_(1968)#Augus t_1981_strike

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    bshock, 22 Oct 2018 @ 8:01pm

    A right you don't dare to exercise is no right at all.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    UhhhWhatWasThat, 22 Oct 2018 @ 8:51pm

    Where's the training for the cops to act like... COPS?

    That needs to be implemented throughout the country.

    I'd say all cops need to be fitted with shock collars.

    Every time they start to act like criminals, they get zapped, about 10 times before it settles down again.

    We'll set up the po-po-mon centers across the country, with people hired to watch over the po-pos, Po-po-mon watchers as it were.
    Tag-line: "Gotta watch them all!!"

    If the po-po take the collar off, they are no longer po-po.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 22 Oct 2018 @ 9:28pm

    I'm sure this is like many laws in Tx, subject to gross interpretation. White kids will get a pass, kids of color must attend.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    John Smith, 23 Oct 2018 @ 1:47am

    "Comply now, complain later."

    MOST cops are not murderous psychopaths.

    For those who are, the people were already in trouble.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Uriel-238 (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 1:00pm

      "MOST cops are not murderous psychopaths."

      From where I'm standing, there are, in Law Enforcemen:

      A few murderous psychopaths

      A whole bunch of corrupt power abusers and profiteers

      A whole bunch of enablers of the above two groups

      A few genuinely honest, well-meaning officers who haven't yet been forced out by the above groups.

      This is all speculation, of course. We don't really have any viable studies (that I know of) but the bad apples have rotted most of the barrel.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2018 @ 5:14am

    Private schools would not be subject to that. Private schools make their own graduation rules and are not subject to this new law.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 5:56am

    Because clearly That is where the problem is...

    Try to address a broken relationship between the public and police, respond by requiring students to take a course that might as well be boiled down to 'If you see a badge, submit', and include a few lies in the process.

    Oh yeah, that's sure to make things much better... for the police. In the short term.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2018 @ 6:30am

    The police are afraid

    As they should be; their lives are on the line daily.

    Police brutality won't end until Police accountability begins. I'm not talking 'administrative leave with pay' either. I mean unpaid suspension during the investigation, and if found guilty, prison sentences.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2018 @ 6:52am

    I was home sick one day and happened to catch a few minutes of "The View".. They were discussing cops at the time. One of the hosts said of her HS age child, they want to be rebellious towards cops, call them names, act tough.. And the feckless-cvnt, instead of saying she took the opportunity to teach her kid that cops are people who don't deserve to be treated with disrespect, said the opposite, that she is worried that one may over-react to this behavior..

    If parents won't tell kids to be respectful, someone has to.

    And to paraphrase the late great George Carlin.. Respect is learned at home. If your kid's a disrespectful little shit, it's your fault.. not society, not video games, yours.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2018 @ 6:55am

      Re:

      True. So cops learn to be disrespectful little cunts that escalate everything at home from the rest of their multi-generations of LEO family members? Makes sense.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      mhajicek (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 8:18am

      Re:

      Respect is earned. The majority of cops do not deserve respect. The modicum of respect they receive is only due to their power to kill without consequence; it's not really respect, it's fear and hatred.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2018 @ 11:23am

      Re:

      You seem to admit that respect is earned not demanded, and yet you say ... "cops are people who don't deserve to be treated with disrespect,". Make up your mind.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Toom1275 (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 8:16am

    Cops should get training too

    But wouldn't they need to pass 9th grade first?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2018 @ 9:00am

    Like wild animals

    It is disturbing that people need to be taught how to act around cops like they are some sort of large dangerous predator. Don't make any sudden movements is literally the exact same advice. Along with running away being a way to get chased so back away slowly and try not to draw their attention.

    They aren't a force of nature they are a part of our society. Which is what makes it so fucked up.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Uriel-238 (profile), 24 Oct 2018 @ 6:08am

      Or another caste

      The behavior of law enforcement officers in the United States reminds me of the Freikorps of the Weimar Republic that served as law enforcement after WWI. They were already of an elevated caste in Germany to the local civilians, and culture was still not far removed from feudalism. Germany had a constitution but still was run by aristocracy.

      The Freikorps pretty much went around and took what they needed, whether it was food, shelter, bedfellows or even available liquid assets. When there were disagreements regarding parity, they could quickly escalate to violence, and massacre an entire (extended) family if necessary to secure their dominance.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Tin-Foil-Hat, 23 Oct 2018 @ 10:23am

    Respect

    I don't know but I suspect that "most cops don't deserve respect" is not fair, simply because treating people like shit is an asshole thing to do.

    For cops I imagine the hardest part of the cop's job is working with the public. For the breief period I've had to do it I van tell you it sucks.

    That isn't to say that this mandatory "obey without question" class isn't BS or the reverence for police and acceptance of brutality and corruption should be shrugged off.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 Oct 2018 @ 4:14am

      Re: Respect

      "because treating people like shit is an asshole thing to do."

      Then maybe the cops should stop doing it.

      Many people do not see the shit going down and therefore do not think it a problem .. for them anyway.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      The Wanderer (profile), 25 Oct 2018 @ 9:13am

      Re: Respect

      As I usually put it:

      "Everyone deserves courtesy by default, until they demonstrate by their actions that they don't deserve it.

      "No one deserves respect by default, until they demonstrate by their actions that they do deserve it."

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.