Very few rich cities, formally speaking. I know Singapore uses formal physical punishment. In worldwide practice, however, police will often be a bit rougher than they perhaps have to (or have the right to) be when arresting if they feel someone deserves it. Many judges also silently tolerate this.
> Very few rich cities, formally speaking. I know Singapore uses formal physical punishment.
For extremely serious crimes, not his list of public indecency. For instance:
* Under the Environmental Public Health Act, it is an offence to urinate or defecate "in or upon any street, arcade, vacant land, river, canal, ditch, drain or watercourse or in any place to which the public has access except in any sanitary convenience provided for such purpose." The penalty is a fine of up to $1,000 for a first offence, and up to $2,000 and $5,000 for the second and third offence respectively. [1] [2]
There is a presence of street beggars that doesn't exist back in Australia / New Zealand that are quite noticable here (although less than in other european cities). Knowing how die Bayerische Polizei operate I am surprised they aren't surpressed as well. I just wonder why that is?
You’re right. The peaceful homeless camp at the Kolumbusplaz vanished from one day to the next but the accordion beggar near the Viktualienmarkt remains. No clue.
I'd consider the usual process for a street arrest to be a beating by itself. That's not even to say it isn't "reasonable force" to protect the officers, just that it often looks like it must hurt like hell.
I mean, they aren’t wrong, per se. I think if that’s the price we pay to not have people doing the things GP described then it seems like an acceptable price.
I would prefer that criminals were not beaten and that we find a better solution. I don’t think we have to choose between police brutality and crime.
Agreed. But once convicted they should never be allowed back on the force. That kind of stupidity is one of the driving forces behind the whole defund the police movement and one of the side effects of that is that you end up with less police rather than with more disciplined police which would have been a far better solution.
Without a police force dense societies usually can not function.
I swear the same pattern happens to every political movement. As soon as they get the limelight, the dumbest ideas take over. It's probably related to the bikeshed phenomenon.
Defund the police does have a certain legitimate point in the US, where police are basically the catch all for dealing with any kind of social problem. In fact I think if it were phrased differently, most cops would rather there be another type of department that responded to sticky social situations.
But yes, the fundamental issue is really a lack of law and order for law enforcement itself, which decreases the public trust and increases adversarialism. The average person seeing a cop and reflexively thinking how to avoid getting their attention and avoid getting hassled for some bullshit is an indicator of a deep set problem. The cancer was fueled by drug criminalization and other crushing nanny statism (eg the draconian ways that traffic laws are enforced), but it would take a lot more than simply rolling those back to regain the public trust.
Quite. It's really a pity because as things are they will have to get much worse before they can get better again. And the ones who stand the most to lose are the ones that are the least likely to have any appreciation for the complexity of this all. Simplistic solutions only get you worse problems.
In what cities does any of this earn you a good beating?