Juries bring in their selective biases, but those other objective people are supposed to select as objective a jury as they possibly can. I'm not saying that always happens perfectly, of course, but that's what is supposed to happen.

@bo- but it would never be a "higher" standard in that case. It would just be a higher than current standard.

which would then put police on equal standard....

Murder is murder. I don't care who commits the act. That's not the higher standard I'm talking about. That would, as you say, make a court subjective, but police are civilians, so that's not okay. The police should be held to a higher standard in that they are entrusted with permission to carry weapons that a civilian is not allowed to carry, do so without concealment, and use them when necessary in order to protect themselves or civilian lives. As things are, people seem to think of police as thugs, which is not wrong because that's how many of them act (and we as societies tend to generalize). That's not the standard they should operate at.

"@tolstoy, the national guard was created in its current form ( meaning the laws ad codes it goes by under wilson) it was created in 1776 as the "minute men" who later took on various local names and only became collectively called the national guard under wilson. doesnt change that they were created in 1776 and what they were created for."

Is this what they're teaching in cadet school these days? The state militia system has its roots from long before 1776 - all the way back to medieval England. And the "minute men" started shooting cops - excuse me, redcoats - in April of 1775, before any act of the Continental Congress "created" them. And the creation of the National Guard was not a "rebranding" - it was a wholescale federalization of the militia system during the wave of centralizing reforms we call the Progressive Movement.

Bo - as is often the case with me and you i agree about everything.... except one vital detail..... which for me is the separate courts. its a proven process that if implemented would not only provide further reaching oversight but also restore the american peoples trust in their police which is a vital necessity if any of this is t be fixed.

@tolstoy- very good. sorry i didnt elaborate as much as you and generalized all of that, but thank you for understanding that the National Guard was created in 1776 (thats when the continental congress the first U.S government created them, before that there was no U.S government and that is why the date is 1776)

But you seem to think that a cop is a murderer. No, a cop is a cop. Once a cop commits murder, he is a murderer, not a cop. I don't know what else to say.

No I think a cop is a cop, and a police officer who commits a murder is different than a civilian who commits a murder because a civillian can not say "I am protected by a SOP" a police officer can.

Everyone has their standing/standard (not sure which you're using) operating procedures at their place of work. There are a number of reasons for military tribunals beyond an elevated perception of soldiers that simply don't apply to cops.

Interesting discussion. Turning to another perspective on all this -- is Baltimore pretty much finished now? It was already a very troubled city. It's hard to see it not becoming Detroit now. Does anybody see hope for it?

@abge

No, we are more or less on the same page. If a cop kills someone while following SOP he shouldn't be treated as a murderer. If he does it in cold blood, he should be treated as a murderer. If he breaks SOP, he should be put on trial for negligence and lose his job (none of this keeping pension crap).

also, @bo - you're wrong on the paramilitary bit. By layman's definition of what paramilitary is, no the police are not a paramilitary. But if you want a textbook definition, then technically every police force is a paramilitary. What else are SWAT teams?

@semck - Baltimore isn't finished. We'll see how long this rioting continues, but I think the community leaders are trying to get this under control.

So, uh, I found out why Freddie Gray ran from the police. His criminal record:

March 20, 2015: Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance
March 13, 2015: Malicious destruction of property, second-degree assault
January 20, 2015: Fourth-degree burglary, trespassing
January 14, 2015: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute
December 31, 2014: Possession of narcotics with intent to distribute
December 14, 2014: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance
August 31, 2014: Illegal gambling, trespassing
January 25, 2014: Possession of marijuana
September 28, 2013: Distribution of narcotics, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, second-degree assault, second-degree escape
April 13, 2012: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, violation of probation
July 16, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession with intent to distribute
March 28, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance
March 14, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to manufacture and distribute
February 11, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a controlled dangerous substance
August 29, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, violation of probation
August 28, 2007: Possession of marijuana
August 23, 2007: False statement to a peace officer, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance
July 16, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance (2 counts)

Okay, he has a bit of a rap sheet. Does that mean his killing is justified?

No. But it means that his arrest likely was. Having that rap sheet and running from the cops is probable cause.

True, but does that warrant treatment that resulted in a fatal spinal cord injury?

Nope. Just one of the major questions people have been asking is "why was he even targeted?" This. This is why.

I don't know why Larry Hogan is dicking around with these rioters. If it were me, I'd send in at least two infantry battalions with fixed bayonets and live ammunition. If the rioters don't like batons and tear gas, let's see how they like cold blue steel and M855 ball.

I also would not hesitate to request federal troops or National Guard units from neighboring states. There is NO excuse for rioting. Riots should be treated as insurrection and dealt with accordingly.

Riots = people taking power into their own hands. And the people who do this likely have no other means to do so. They see themselves trapped in their lifes and without control.

That is the underlying problem. 'Learned Helplessness' is an interesting phenomanum (see: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YMPzDiraNnA ) And the systems we have built disempower and seek to control - i guess all power structures inherently do that.

The more control you have the more you can concentrate power into one place - advertising and propoganda are the current 'popular' forms of control/coercion, which is a step up from the days of using violence - except the state still uses violence when it needs to. But this violence ( rioting, which i'm sure will be met by more violence from the state ) is just a sympthon.

Being told to buy, buy, buy, when you don't have an income, is a proximate cause. If the message is: you must do well at school to be successful - and many of these kids see school as a waste of time, then they are effectively bein told 'you'll never be a success'

So sure, bring in the national guard; treat the sympthon. But don't bother discussing the underlying cause.

"No. But it means that his arrest likely was. Having that rap sheet and running from the cops is probable cause."

Look at it from his perspective for a second - having this rap sheet and this negative relationship with the police is probably why he ran.

Whether he was guilty or not, he probably knew he was screwed already.

Not saying he was smart to run, or that the police should have killed him. Just tring to see his side.

"So sure, bring in the national guard; treat the sympthon. But don't bother discussing the underlying cause. "

I think people are discussing the underlying cause plenty, ora. But the point remains that (while GF's solution is more draconian than most of us would want to consider) the rioting is itself causing real damage, mainly to the rioters and their community. It's not just a symptom. It's a cause of significant further pain and loss. Detroit never recovered from its riots, because the (often minority-owned) businesses in the inner city just shut down and left.

I agree that it's quite important to discuss the cause of riots and of injustice. It's also important to have zero tolerance whatsoever for riots.

How is Baltimore even close to Detroit's level? Don't you need to build a wall to be on the same level of stupidity as Detroit?

Gunfighter06: Firing live ammunition to crowd is called a massacre in historiography. How could you defend such atrocities, much less advocate for them?

JECE. You just have to look at Gunfighter's name to find the answer to your question

@ JECE

I wouldn't think twice to use lethal force when lives and property are at stake, as they are in Baltimore right now.

I'm not saying that blindly firing into a crowd is a good/justifiable idea, but a bayonet charge into crowds in order to disperse them would be perfectly reasonable. Looters should be shot on sight too, which is where the live ammunition comes in handy.

Or we could do what Reagan did to the UC Berkeley rioters during the Vietnam War - Surround the whole area with National Guardsmen with fixed bayonets so they can't escape, then drop tear gas on them via helicopter. Reagan was a shitty leader and a shitty president, but I do admire his riot control tactics while he was governor of Taxifornia.

@ bo_sox48

I think semck was referring to the after-effects of the 1967 Detroit Riot, which is one of the top three biggest riots in US history (after the 1992 LA Riots and the Civil War-era New York City Draft Riots). As an aside the 1967 Detroit Riot is fascinating to study. It lasted over four days and required both the Michigan National Guard and the entire 82nd Airborne Division to restore order.

semck had a point. Detroit's current status as a shithole can be attributed to three main causes: 1) Over five decades of Democratic leadership 2) Labor unions 3) The aftermath of the 1967 Detroit Riot.

Please read:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/nonviolence-as-compliance/391640/

CommanderByron: You really don't get it, do you? Forget about all this talk of higher standards. As Tolstoy said on the first page, what matters is holding police to professional standards. Letting a suspect die (in custody or otherwise) is not professional. A separate court system which judges police actions post facto would not change professional standards. Only professional training, better police manuals and smarter recruitment strategies can bring police actions into line with international standards.

The court system is the best tool we have for upholding the laws of the land. A separate court system only introduces another possibility of abuse, especially if the judges are fellow police officers. The military courts of the United States you seem to hold in high esteem have not been very keen on prosecuting war crimes. What makes you think that police courts would be more keen on prosecuting police misconduct?