Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> I’m not American.

Well then.

- US police are above the law, and have free union-provided legal counsel.

If a city prosecutes an officer, he will sue them right back, and the union will threaten the careers of city councilpersons, DAs and judges at the next election. A perfect circle of corruption.

- DA's and judges are elected, so political from Day One of their careers. Public unions hold 20% or more of the votes and vote in a bloc. Either play with the unions, or finish second.

- the US is the most successful multicultural large country in history, but that makes things more complicated.

- everybody who wants a handgun has one, or two. A lot of people driving around illegally have a loaded gun under their seat.



I know that. The US police are a mob. It’s very apparent, from outside looking in.

How does that relate to my argument? My point was that attempting to tackle those factors is the actual solution.

(Would need a source on your 20% claim though. Endorsed by the police union is an appeal to voters outside the union, not an appeal to union share of electorate)


> Public unions hold 20% or more of the votes

No, they don't. Public employees don’t, outside of a few localities with extremely high concentrations (which are usually military, which isn't unionized) make up 20% of the electorate, much less public sector unions holding 20% of votes.

> and vote in a bloc

No, they don't. Law enforcement and corrections unions often don't even lean toward the same major party as most other public sector unions.


In case you didn't notice, every election there's lawn signs saying "endorsed by the Police Union" or similar.

So get your facts straight.

If you want to see DA politics in action, watch just about any Law & Order episode when they discuss optics. Those "stories" are based on current affairs.


> In case you didn't notice, every election there's lawn signs saying "endorsed by the Police Union" or similar.

That doesn't contradict anything I said. There are signs saying that not because public sector unions as a whole either make up the 20% of the electorate you've claimed or vote in a unified block across different public sector unions as you've claimed, but because the general public, and especially voters that consider “law and order” an important concern, are particularly likely to be swayed by law enforcement union endorsements.

> If you want to see DA politics in action, watch just about any Law & Order episode when they discuss optics. Those "stories" are based on current affairs.

...often, quite badly. I've got a Political Science degrees from a subprogram specialized in the pragmatics of US electoral politics at all levels; “Law & Order” is, I know, entertaining to a lot of people, but it's not really a guide to reality on, well, anything.


ok, PoliSci man:

Governments employ 20 percent or more of workers in nine states

https://www.bizjournals.com/bizjournals/on-numbers/scott-tho...


> Governments employ 20 percent or more of workers in nine states

The claim was public sector unions, not government employees. And the claim was 20% of votes, not 20% of workers. A substantial share of government employees are not unionized; this is particularly true of federal government employees; and a substantial share of voters are not employed (some unemployed, but more out of the workforce, looked students, homemakers, and retirees.)

And nine states leave 41, or 82% of the total, where even that far-from-what-you-originally-claimed situation still doesn't apply.


   a city prosecutes an officer, he will sue them right back
That's not how it works. First, you conflate criminal with civil law. Second, cities don't prosecute.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: