That's kinda what it comes down to for me though. Can you EVER be 100% sure? Even if you're 99.5% sure, odds are sooner or later you'll execute someone who was innocent. And in my opinion that one single lost innocent life means the practice is unjustifiable.

I wonder how many people who disagree with me are pro life.

My understanding is that "persons" refers to people in discrete groups, where what separates those groups is pertinent to the topic being discussed.

For example - 'indigenous persons' refers collectively to indigenous people, but acknowledges that there are separate subgroups of indigenous people within that. You could equally say "indigenous people" and it would be correct but you lose that nuance by not acknowledging that there are internal divisions within the group you are referring to.

Not saying that's the dictionary definition, but that's how it's generally used in my field.

Caecilius est in horto

I've been inside his mother jokes on him

As an outsider looking in, I've seen a lot of footage of rallies and events (on both sides) that are just absolutely crazy to me. Almost dystopian. People with painted faces, all kinds of merch, hollering and shouting and cheering like it's the X Factor or a rock concert or something. You see people being interviewed outside the events and it's like a festival in the background. It's really, really bizarre. We have problems with our politics here too but not like that. I can't believe that all of those people are ACTUALLY that passionate about any policies themselves, it's just vague culture wars nonsense with a bizarre personality contest as a proxy for it.

As I say, I'm not trying to act superior. My country has its share of problems too, just a very different sort.

Am I going mad or does she look a bit like Elon Musk?

How long have you been working here? Okay, good.

Nah it's a strangely worded title you're good

That's true but I found that nothing was really so urgent that it particularly mattered. If it did, there should be a 24 hour contingency anyway.

I guess the logic is, and I don't agree, that people will burn out through the day and spend the last couple hours phoning it in. That's not my experience of what actually happens but I think that's what some people think.

I worked a 4 day week for years (4*10 hours) with my old employer and it was fantastic. And I can say for sure that it didn't affect productivity for me or my team.

I don't have kids but several of my colleagues did and it was a game changer for them. Especially the one whose partner worked for the same organisation, who could sync it up to save an absolute fortune on childcare (which is absurdly expensive here).

Another colleague was a single mother and had the choice to choose which days she did each week, meaning she could do more with her child and make it to events and such. I have no doubt that that will have a long term positive impact on her son too.

For me as a childless person I could use 2 days of annual leave to get 5 days off straight. £40 return ticket to Spain or Italy, a cheap hotel, and you can have a lovely little holiday any time of year.

I had to leave for unrelated personal reasons but that shift pattern was glorious. No less work got done and everyone was happier. And it turns out - surprise surprise - when your staff are happy they produce better work.

It's such a no brainer. But I won't get excited, because a certain generation seems to take any improvement for the younger generation as some kind of personal attack.

Bit of an empty threat when he can just upload his consciousness into a different copy of his current model.

Ur... Yeah?

I think this tips it over the edge for me to switch to Firefox

Would it be worth reaching out to them on social media? Something like this would be great PR for them.

Well, the first A in ACAB stands for "all". Meaning the claim is not limited to America. It's a statement about policing as an institution in general, and so I think it's perfectly reasonable for me to contribute to the discussion even though I'm a foreigner.

I don't think my view can be dismissed as anecdotal. A person basing a view off of one anecdote is anecdotal. A person who has worked in the field for years and has multiple degrees in the area isn't giving anecdotal evidence, they're giving expert and specialist insight. Furthermore, I was specifically asked about my individual experience.

I defend the profession because it's my opinion that policing CAN be a force for good. I don't have direct experience with America so I won't comment on that. But your accusations that even "good" cops are complicit in corruption by turning a blind eye or defending it is simply not true across the board and massively unfair towards people who sacrifice a lot for a very difficult job for selfless reasons. The organisation I worked for had tens of thousands of officers and staff so I'm obviously not going to claim it had zero issues and zero corruption, but it tended to be isolated to specific teams with their own internal culture that outsiders are rarely even aware of. I know this based on both my own experience and my studies of police corruption as part of my first degree.

I can honestly say with my hand on my heart that corruption was extremely rare in my professional experience. And when I saw something questionable (which was almost always down to incompetence rather than malice) I raised it and it was dealt with as appropriate.

I haven't seen any comments qualifying their statement with "ACAB but only America" so I don't think I've "waded in" at all (even putting aside the fact that this is a public forum anyway). All means all, and I object to such a blanket statement. I want to reiterate that I'm really not just trying to bootlick. As I said before, I have no good will towards my precious employer (for totally separate reasons) and I do agree that there are issues in modern policing that need to be addressed.

I've intentionally left my country ambiguous to highlight that saying ALL of any group is a ridiculous statement, because I could be from anywhere in the world and somehow you think you know enough to apply that statement to me and my former colleagues.

As I said, I wrote my dissertation on policing in minority ethnic communities. I specifically went out of my way to understand the sensitivities before I started the career. I also have a master's degree in human rights law, and continue to work in the legal field dealing with these topics every day. I am far better placed than most to understand both sides of the situation (though I'd argue against the assumption that there are 'sides').

How can you say there are all these videos all the time when I haven't even said where I'm from? Because in my country, incidents like what I see often from America are extremely rare.

I dismiss the ACAB movement because it is by definition reductionist. When you say ALL of something is anything in society then I will immediately raise my eyebrows to that claim. Society is not that simple.

The point still stands.

Here in my country we've had a lot of very high profile cases of abuse and even serial murder in the healthcare profession. It's also a position of power that can attract the wrong sort, and it's very well researched how the healthcare sector is institutionally racist and provides worse outcomes - even death - to minority ethnic communities. Are all doctors bastards?

If it's not the point that all cops are bad then why do you use a phrase which states the exact opposite? How can you, with a straight face, justify a stance and narrative that intentionally removes nuance as you just said?

The whole black lives matter thing isn't relevant to my country so I won't comment on that as I quite simply don't know enough about it.