Oh, do cops not like being surveiled and held accountable? That's crazy yo.
Perfect opportunity to clean house.
Oh, do cops not like being surveiled and held accountable? That's crazy yo.
Perfect opportunity to clean house.
Tracking state property should be the norm, actually?
Principle of least privilege shouldn't allow the mayor to be privy to that information.
That is NOT fucking least privileged access, don't make shit up.
Source: work in security for 15+ years. I know bullshit when I smell it.
What part of the mayor's job is keeping track of assets?
Um that’s what an elected mayor should do. Ensure that there isn’t fraud, waste and abuse.
Some random police employee is probably responsible for inventory management. But the police chief is responsible for that employee and the mayor is responsible for the chief. So if the mayor believes that assets are being misused they have a responsibly to try and figure it out or they become culpable to misused assets. The lack of top down process ownership is a problem these days. Responsibility rarely rolls uphill but it should.
I think you'll find the comment I responded to was saying tracking state property should be the norm.
I'll further guess you'll find that companies have departments for asset protection.
And if you'll stay with me once more. The security team can reference surveillance to check if timesheets are being falsified.
Now to reiterate: at no point was the mayor involed in seeing the actual data rather they would make a request to the relevant parties.
So how do you think a mayor should deal with police lying on their timesheets?
Ask security to check the cameras to see if they are leaving early or showing up late. Ask them about login times to see if people are signing in or out early.
Ask whomever tracks the cars to see if they are being signed in or out at odd times. Even asking them just for a list of times a specific car was signed in or out.
At both of these points there is a person who decides whether the mayor should be allowed specific information given their duties. (In the OP example it's for a time sheet that they manage). Also note, both of these provide less information than the OP.
So the entire force was committing fraud, is what I’m hearing from those resignations. Charge the mfers instead of letting them just fuck off one county over.
If your boss put an illicit tracker on your car, then put up cameras to surveil when you get to the office, how would you respond?
I know I'd fucking quit. Especially when I have to be responding to calls and emails at all hours of the day
If I was a public servant I’d expect that every place I went with a government car and everything I did in it was recorded, because for police the alternative is fucking nuts. I’d also expect incredibly basic fact checking investigations like that when someone was suspected of fraud.
By the way, the entire department wasn’t tracked. Per the article only the chief was, yet everyone quit. If you can’t see crooked when it’s staring you in the face then I can’t help you.
Crying about workers’ rights for cops is ass-backwards when they protect capital over workers, regardless.
If your boss put an illicit tracker on your car, then put up cameras to surveil when you get to the office, how would you respond?
I'd expect some kind of accountability if I were fudging my time sheets.
My work issued phone has GPS tracking on it. My company issued laptop has GPS tracking on it. My work issued vehicle has GPS tracking on it. I have a camera that faces in and out of the vehicle as well. That's just how most companies are these days.
Just about everywhere I worked had cameras as standard, and if my employer owned the vehicle I drove, I’d expect the car to be tracked.
I mean I wouldn't be committing fraud and stealing taxpayer dollars to begin with so...
Police should have GPS tracking on work vehicles. It is the same as body cameras, it can exonerate them as well as price wrongdoing.
Truckers have stricter requirements for GPS tracking and cameras than cops I bet.
Truckers have a weaker union than cops
Police unions are the only unions that shouldn't be allowed to exist. Police are enforcers for the ruling class, not labor.
Imo public servants should not be unionized for they are already in a larger union; the government
The government isn’t a union. A union is an organization within a workplace that's controlled by the workers. The government is controlled by the voters, the vast majority of whom don’t work for the government.
That is the union in question. Public service should be something that is controlled entirely by the voters. It is not a career to enrich yourself, it is a service. And if you have grievances with the voters, your bosses, you need to take it to them directly.
I dunno. The Teamsters are not to be trifled with, though they don't have the juice they used to have.
Logistics, you know where your people and equipment are in times of crisis instead of calling everyone on the radio. Pretty sure shipping companies do this for similar reasons, know where the stuff is at all times. If they have a problem with that being part of the job, they can find another one. For an honest cop, this shouldn't even be a question.
Why are the police upset? Do they have something to hide?
Cops love warrantless search until someone has the audacity to use it against them.
On one hand, having your boss micromanage the hell out of you and kind of stalk you is insane.
On the other hand, that's what cops do daily to everyone with ALPR's. I'm not sure where to put my rage on this one lol. How's it feel to be treated the way you treat others?
I used to be a delivery driver for a wholesale bakery. The van was rigged to text my boss every time I went over 55MPH. This was years ago. The fact that there isn’t a similar level of surveillance on police is wild
Restructure and rehire. When one door shuts...
Doesn't have to be about oppression anymore. Today's police force is a relic of the lynch mob era. The mob became the police.
So the cops are fine with surveiling the populace, but when somebody does it to them they're suddenly all butthurt? What a surprise.
Abolish the police with one easy step!
TLDR: The cops appear to have been fudging their time sheets to get money for nothing from the city and taxpayers.
But I can appreciate the amount of oversight this mayor unilaterally decided to enforce on behalf of constituents. Kinda sucks that we can't get this kind of institutional oversight except on a super-local scale.
The article provides no evidence the chief was lying about hit time. There was a tracker and camera, and even the mayor isn't claiming to have collected any proof of fraud
This is the mayor:
Right is right and wrong is wrong. … I turned my life over to Jesus 15 years ago, I’m a recovering drug addict, and I turned my life to Jesus
The mayor comes across as a paranoid addict who treats everyone else like an addict who can't be trusted
TLDR: The cops appear to have been fudging their time sheets to get money for nothing from the city and taxpayers.
Do you have anything to substantiate your claim here?
Separately, it feels very dishonest that you presented it as a TLDR of the article, when the article doesn't make this claim
His constituents are aware of his past and still chose him to represent their values. He shouldn't have to walk on eggshells for the rest of his life.
Timmons says he placed a tracker on the police chief’s truck and a surveillance camera on a car wash pointing at city hall where the chief’s office is because the mayor’s signature goes on the chief’s time sheets and he had concerns about them.
Read closer next time.
@Taldan@lemmy.world is not inaccurate, all they are saying is this isn't cut and dry, and you should keep reading:
Milner Police Chief Lamar Bunn says he’s done nothing wrong.
He says his job is not confined to a building, a vehicle or the city limits, that he’s worked remotely at times on administrative matters, emails, for instance, monitoring the radio and more.
And Bunn says his boss, the city administrator, knows how he works.
“My job doesn’t stop when I leave the office,” he said.
The Mayor is a former alcoholic who thinks he's always right because he found religion.
And if this was anyone other than an officer, Lemmy would be in an uproar about invasion of privacy and in-office requirements.
And if this was anyone other than an officer, Lemmy would be in an uproar about invasion of privacy and in-office requirements.
Yeah, because that's a very important detail that can't be ignored.
And I might think you have a point but for the mass resignation. It's common practice here in the US for cops to just take a job in another department when they get themselves into trouble. These frauds probably already have new gigs lined up.
Do you have anything to substantiate your claim here?
IMO police corruption is so common in this country that the burden of proof is on the cops to prove they’re not corrupt. As far as I can tell, “lack of accountability” is the main reason people have been getting into the profession (evidence: lower and lower rates of people becoming police officers ever since Ferguson in 2014).
Uh oh somebody is upset they can't commit fraud and steal taxpayer dollars anymore.
Milner Police Chief Lamar Bunn says he’s done nothing wrong.
I wonder if that excuse would work on him when pulling someone over after retrieving their Flock data.
One of the best things that New York City did while I was living there was to get rid of qualified immunity for police officers. Those who enforce the law should be the last people who should ever be considered to be ABOVE the law.
Simply resigning from one’s position should never absolve one from a crime nor be means from escape from investigation into/prosecution for one’s commission of/participation in a crime/crimes. And for police officers, specifically, when resigning from one police department, it should preclude the ability to ever join another.
Those who are entrusted to enforce the law should be held to a higher standard, not a lower one. This is one of the greatest civil failures of American society that must be corrected as soon as possible.
Just want to clarify, they limited qualified immunity in specific situations, they haven’t gotten rid of it completely.
They both did and did not. If you wanna know the specifics, I suggest you look up the law. I’m not a legal scholar, nor am I qualified to explain it here.
Give us a tl;dr from your understanding. Sounds interesting.
Not to be a jerk, but
If you wanna know the specifics, I suggest you look up the law. I’m not a legal scholar, nor am I qualified to explain it here.
You are responsible for your own knowledge. Demanding that others teach you? Fuck you.
So here's the thing. This is a place called "social media". In such a space humans exchange information. Crazy, right? If I wanted to live my online life inside a search engine, I would do so. But I like to talk to and learn from other people. You're not one of those people, but you get my drift.
That was his nice way of trying to help correct your misconception
You are wrong. Your understanding of qualified immunity in NYC is wrong. We can't help correct your misconceptions if we don't know more details about your incorrect beliefs
When we look it up, all we see is qualified inmunity still exists and has not been ended in NYC. We cannot look up why you incorrectly believe it has been
Someone was trying to correct you in the gentlest way possible, without making you embarrassed about being wrong and you tell them, "fuck you". Look in a mirror buddy
That was his nice way of trying to help correct your misconception
Nice attempt at gaslighting. But not a very good one.
You are wrong
Also know, you gaslighting sack of shit:
https://council.nyc.gov/press/2021/03/25/2079/
Since you’re obviously here to troll, I’m blocking you.
What an absolutely psychotic response this is.
Using facts and evidence to prove that you’re wrong… “ psychotic”?
“Psychotic” is the inability to admit that you’re wrong, even in the face of incontrovertible evidence. Like Trump. But, I’m sure, there is somebody else you can blame for your own mistakes… Lol.
Maybe you should build a ballroom to feel better about yourself, lol
What facts exactly do you think you gave there? Cuz I read the link you provided. Nowhere in there does it say that qualified immunity has completely ended in New York City.
But yeah, you do seem unhinged.
Actually I'm kind of confused by your response too. First of all you didn't provide evidence of anything because your link is about a plan to vote not one that already passed, so technically you gave zero evidence of anything. But I will assume they passed the vote, just to move forward the conversation. More pertinent maybe the actual article seems to support what the other people in this thread are saying and not what you're saying. So I'm confused why you think what you posted was such Rock Solid evidence:
To increase accountability, the Council will vote on a bill that will effectively end qualified immunity as a defense for certain civil rights violations.
So the people saying they only ended it in certain cases seem correct based upon your own evidence. What am I missing here?
First of all you didn't provide evidence
When you start with such a blatant and obvious lie, everything else you say can be thrown in the trash
Did you forget that every comment made beforehand is visible to everyone? Including my comment that contains the evidence you deny exists?
Wow you didn't address anything I said in my comment. I even quoted your so-called evidence and why it was faulty, but you completely ignored it then called me a liar.
You know what, no, I agree with the other guy now. You're coming off as psychotic.
Sifting through your bullshit lies isn’t worth my time. Why would I bother? to jerk off your ego? That’s not my job.
And giving validity to your false claims, doesn’t serve me either.
Go lie to and gaslight someone as stupid as you, which I clearly am not.
I’ve proven you wrong before you even dared to speak. And if you haven’t realized what a stupid mistake you made by even commenting here in the first place, let me make it clear now: the facts proved you wrong before you even spoke, and I will continue to point out what a ridiculous and stupidly wrong ass you are until you simply stop proving that yourself.
You are a victim of nothing other than your own dogmatic ignorance. I suggest you step away from social media and work on some self improvement. And to aid you in that, I’m gonna block you now, so the only one you have to argue with is yourself. Hopefully, you’ll realize the absurd foolishness of your endeavors, but my hopes for that are not high.
Best of luck. You’ll need it.
Mostly agreed, but there are a thousand legitimate reasons to resign and that act shouldn't remove them from their profession. Same with getting fired. Who hasn't had an asshole boss or been fired unjustly (or at least known someone who was)?
We need to hold the police force who re-employs the asshole cops accountable. Sure, hire 'em! But if they step out of line just once, that force is getting sued into the ground.
1000 reasons? A dangerous myth that has led us into our present situation. Are there special exceptions? Yes, but they are very few and far between. Their exceptions to every rule, obviously, but that requires intelligent discretion exercised one incident at a time. And they are very rare.
In reality, all cops are power, abusing, fascist pieces of shit. That is the entire reason they became cops in the first place. If not, there would be no people to be cops. If they weren’t fascist psychopathic pieces of shit, there wouldn’t be people available to be cops, so, logically, the fact that there are police officers dictates the fact that they are all psychopathic monsters. If there is any evidence to the contrary, anyone is welcome to present it, but until anyone does, the logical conclusion is that anyone and everyone who is a police officer is and was recruited specifically because they are a psychopathic monster.
I agree with all that about cops, but you think a resignation is proof of malfeasance? Fuck me, I have more reasons than most to hate pigs, but I'm not blinded by that hate.
Qualified immunity would not apply to any timecard fraud that may have been committed
So mass surveillance is perfectly fine, because it helps detect crime. Even if it doesn't detect a single crime over the course of 20 years.
But surveillance for police officers is bad, even if it immediately detects crime?
all 92 comments