38 comments

[ 4.3 ms ] story [ 88.2 ms ] thread
Apologies, I haven't seen it here before.
It's very common for items to be posted here on a semi-regular basis. Some things just appeal to the hacker mindset, and when seen, get posted. Mostly I'm providing a link to previous discussion so people can see what HN said about the matter last time.
A timeline would be an interesting feature to add to posts, but it might be difficult to prevent abuse, without adding up down voting on each timeline item.
Ugh, 'discussion' was submitted more than 5 years ago. The world has changed since then.
If nothing else, that makes it even more interesting to see the previous discussion, and see how attitudes have changed, if at all.
Do you have an automated method of generating this list?
The last person to do that got yelled at by everyone a lot :(

I always found it very useful.

I have a script. I put in search terms, it pops out the list of items, along with estimated numbers of comments. I then, by hand, construct the reply.
I'm a college instructor. Even though my courses have nothing to do with law, I show Duane's videos to every freshmen class. I got tired of seeing good students lose their fin-aid after the local cops go around and do their annual drug task-force roundup.

For years I've been skeptical of the efficacy of police tactics and strategy. I'd say that skepticism has evolved to a default of suspicion of any police activity.

I find myself contemplating installation of bars on my doors and windows, security fencing, etc; not for fear of "normal" crime, but of errant police activity. I wish I had some statistics upon which to base that notion. I'm a fairly normal, caucasian, middle-class guy with a wife and two kids, no criminal record; and I am more fearful that I will be harmed by police criminality or ineptitude than by non-police criminals.

Your fear is generally misplaced, here[0] are police misconduct stats (granted they don't count every single episode of police misconduct) and here[1] are crime stats. Certainly one episode of police misconduct is too much, but it's not nearly as high as crimes the police weren't involved in.

I think sites like HN and reddit showcase police misconduct and this leads to an exaggerated view of how prevalent it is compared to other dangers. It's similar to the MSM and sexual abuse/stranger danger.

[0]http://www.policemisconduct.net/2010-npmsrp-police-misconduc...

[1]http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/crimestats

I would take these figures with a grain of salt because I doubt any accurate statistics of police misconduct are kept.
Certainly not, but it's not even close. There were ~5,000 reports of police misconduct and ~12,000 homicides in 2010.
This may be true, but police misconduct is everywhere and most of those homicides are localized to places I don't live.
Of course there is a lot more non-police crime than there are reported incidents of police misconduct. What about simple mistakes? I'm not sure if buffoonery is counted as misconduct. What I'm really referring to though, is what is my own personal exposure to risk of harm? I wouldn't be surprised to find that it is more likely that police might kick my door down and shoot my dogs, either by mistake, misunderstanding, or misuse of power, than say armed burglars.
The main difference of course is that murderers occasionally go to prison for killing people. Whereas the percentage of police ever actually convicted for committing a crime while on duty is so low they might as well have immunity.
They don't count every episode and are self-reported. I have a very hard time trusting those stats.
They mention at one point what people say when they are stopped by the police for speeding.

"Do you know how fast you were going?" "Well... 38...40?" (In a 35 MPH zone).

I was told to always say "No, Officer, I don't know why you pulled me over". This seems to be a good idea now, as it cannot be seen as a confession. What should you say when the officer pulls you over? Can you plead the 5th and say nothing? How well does that go over?

Are you not required to know what speed you were driving at? How else would you be able to stay under the limit?
A driver obviously cannot constantly keep his/her eyes on the instruments.
No obviously not, but you should have a sense of speed enough to not deviate much from the last time you checked.
Not precise enough that I would testify against myself or against someone else.
I don't get pulled over often, but the last time that I got pulled over I told the officer that I believed I was going the speed limit. It's a subtle distinction, but it seemed to work as he had no other reason to pull me over and didn't write me a ticket.
The last time I tried that the officer angrily barked back at me, "GIVE ME A NUMBER." So YMMV, I guess.
What if you really are doing 35 and tell the officer "I was doing 35"? Surely that's perfectly fine right?
No. You're required to not exceed the speed limit.
I suppose it depends what is the intended meaning of the question - you want my average speed over the last few minutes? Since you've been following me? The latter is probably the intended meaning and, in that case, I really can't be expected to know.
Any time a cop tries to trick you into incriminating yourself by asking you a question like "Do you know how fast you were going?" where giving any answer could be bad, i'd recommend just answering the question with a question, "How fast?". If he continues to badger you, simply remain very polite and refuse to directly answer any question and pass the response requirement back to the cop.
I've heard both that you should not answer for fear of incriminating yourself, and that you should answer because not knowing how fast you're going means you're negligent and that's also a crime. (I'm neither a lawyer nor know which is the better choice)
IANAL, but the way I've had it described to me is not knowing exactly how fast you're going is not negligence, as it's always a better idea to keep your eyes on the road instead of a speedometer. Hitting people is a potentially more serious crime than speeding. I'd love to hear a lawyer's take on this, however.
Had this a couple of times in the UK. It's a new tactic here. I think they learned it from some naff US cop reality show.

Neither time was I actually speeding. It was an estimate on their part and both were in an area with a good probability of bagging a moron who confesses immediately out of confusion.

Usually results in a frustrated piggy who asks to search the vehicle[1] which you don't have to agree to, insurance check, vehicle check and a warning to drive more carefully (bear in mind 450k miles driven, 22 years, advanced and clean driving license, no insurance claims, no speeding tickets, no parking tickets ever).

[1] I have considered purchasing a large quantity of cheap sex toys on Alibaba to keep in the back to make it embarrassing for them when I do agree for a search to be made...

It seems to me that most of the issues are a result of the jury system, where people feel that the defendant is guilty or not.

There was an example at the end where a witness claims she saw the defentant at the crime scene. Her testimony would have been ignored because it is so unsupported.

But if the defendant stated to the police that he wasn't there, he could be accused of lying and thus be more likely to be convicted.

To me, this just doesn't make sense.

Highs and lows balance -- no worries.

God is perfectly just.

-------

39:12 And she caught him by his garment, saying, Lie with me: and he left his garment in her hand, and fled, and got him out.

39:13 And it came to pass, when she saw that he had left his garment in her hand, and was fled forth, 39:14 That she called unto the men of her house, and spake unto them, saying, See, he hath brought in an Hebrew unto us to mock us; he came in unto me to lie with me, and I cried with a loud voice: 39:15 And it came to pass, when he heard that I lifted up my voice and cried, that he left his garment with me, and fled, and got him out.

39:16 And she laid up his garment by her, until his lord came home.

39:17 And she spake unto him according to these words, saying, The Hebrew servant, which thou hast brought unto us, came in unto me to mock me: 39:18 And it came to pass, as I lifted up my voice and cried, that he left his garment with me, and fled out.

39:19 And it came to pass, when his master heard the words of his wife, which she spake unto him, saying, After this manner did thy servant to me; that his wrath was kindled.

39:20 And Joseph's master took him, and put him into the prison, a place where the king's prisoners were bound: and he was there in the prison.

39:21 But the LORD was with Joseph, and shewed him mercy, and gave him favour in the sight of the keeper of the prison.

39:22 And the keeper of the prison committed to Joseph's hand all the prisoners that were in the prison; and whatsoever they did there, he was the doer of it.

39:23 The keeper of the prison looked not to any thing that was under his hand; because the LORD was with him, and that which he did, the LORD made it to prosper.

40:1 And it came to pass after these things, that the butler of the king of Egypt and his baker had offended their lord the king of Egypt.

40:2 And Pharaoh was wroth against two of his officers, against the chief of the butlers, and against the chief of the bakers.

40:3 And he put them in ward in the house of the captain of the guard, into the prison, the place where Joseph was bound.

40:4 And the captain of the guard charged Joseph with them, and he served them: and they continued a season in ward.

40:5 And they dreamed a dream both of them, each man his dream in one night, each man according to the interpretation of his dream, the butler and the baker of the king of Egypt, which were bound in the prison.

40:6 And Joseph came in unto them in the morning, and looked upon them, and, behold, they were sad.

40:7 And he asked Pharaoh's officers that were with him in the ward of his lord's house, saying, Wherefore look ye so sadly to day? 40:8 And they said unto him, We have dreamed a dream, and there is no interpreter of it. And Joseph said unto them, Do not interpretations belong to God? tell me them, I pray you.

40:9 And the chief butler told his dream to Joseph, and said to him, In my dream, behold, a vine was before me; 40:10 And in the vine were three branches: and it was as though it budded, and her blossoms shot forth; and the clusters thereof brought forth ripe grapes: 40:11 And Pharaoh's cup was in my hand: and I took the grapes, and pressed them into Pharaoh's cup, and I gave the cup into Pharaoh's hand.

40:12 And Joseph said unto him, This is the interpretation of it: The three branches are three days: 40:13 Yet within three days shall Pharaoh lift up thine head, and restore thee unto thy place: and thou shalt deliver Pharaoh's cup into his hand, after the former manner when thou wast his butler.

40:14 But think on me when it shall be well with thee, and shew kindness, I pray thee, unto me, and make mention of me unto Pharaoh, and bring me out of this house: 40:15 For indeed I was stolen away out of the land of the Hebrews: and here also have I done nothing that they should put me into the dungeon.

40:16 When the chief baker saw that the interpretation was good, he said unto Joseph, I also was in my dream, and, behold, I had three white ba...

According to the recent Salinas v. Texas decision it's not even enough to remain silent. You have to assert your 5th amendment privilege immediately.

As described in a number of articles, 'you don't have the right to remain silent.'