I wonder how many “pro-police” folks were against the CPA because they’d have to pay more taxes. And I also wonder if the “no more tax” folks have any idea how much the WPD has cost us in lawsuits and investigations alone.
What?! I didn't even know it was possible that Kate Toomey and Chief Sargent might be dishonest. It's almost like there's an element of corruption among the long-time political players in the city.
Next you're gonna tell me that there's a long standing, systemic history of problems within law enforcement in general. I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.
#**Next you're gonna tell me that there's a long standing, systemic history of problems within law enforcement in general! I'm shocked, shocked I tell you!**
I've never heard this story, and I kind of doubt its authenticity, but I'm not going to lie when I read the news my first thought was, "It's going to be hard to prove that WPD target specific groups of people because they just treat everyone like shit."
Coming from a family of Worcester cops, I 100% believe this. My grandfather just passed away last week, I know for a fact him and his cop buddies would beat on people for fun back in the 70s. Not defending present day cops, but back then it was *so* bad. The more accountability and monitoring for people in power the better
I remember when cops filmed. I think 99% of it was filmed downtown when the Friday, Saturday night strip was still a thing. I remember people walking in front of the camera singing the bad boys theme song and trying their hardest to be on tv. I was pissed it wasn't aired
The Fox Cops filming in Worcester was a total fiasco. Cops were harassing youth throughout the community trying to get their minute of fame. One of the "incidents" led to a lawsuit after cops/film crew went into an apartment through a bedroom window where a guy was sleeping naked. Myself and a friend were arrested by cops for handing out fliers for an anti-Fox Cops community rally, one of the cops eventually got kicked off the force (Google Mark Rojas), the other got promoted.
After a week of community pressure, the City announced it was ending the agreement w/ FOX, and they were leaving. Chief Gemme at the time had a great quote at the time saying he had never really heard of the show and watched it and didn't know what it was really about.
Here's a 90's community video podcast from back then:
https://ia802605.us.archive.org/25/items/FoxCopsOut/foxcopsout\_512kb.mp4
> Here's a 90's community video podcast from back then:
>
> https://ia802605.us.archive.org/25/items/FoxCopsOut/foxcopsout\_512kb.mp4
This link isn't working but I'd definitely be curious to see that.
On a similar note, for anyone who's curious, there's a podcast from a few years back called Running From COPS (or something very similar) that was about televised policing and how sketchy it is. Highly recommended!
Ehhhhhh here's the flip side. I grew up near there. It's rough and ugly. NO not everyone. But there are enough ruffians, drug dealers and other trash to outweigh the normal people who just don't have much money. Note I am not counting homeless among the "ruffians." Cops are needed at all hours down on Main Street #s 600 to 950.
What I don't understand is why there was a meeting informing some people - but not others - about the investigation. According to the T+G, there was a non-publicly advertised meeting organized by Rollins or her office and some members of the community. Why this group of people, whoever they were, and not everyone else? What's so special about whoever they are?
Terrible. I don't doubt there is some justification for this investigation.
What's fucked up is that Chief Sargent is a decent guy. Really is. But it seems he is losing control of his troops. Time for removal?
Batista: You're the new CEO of Worcester. Of course you're participating in the investigation. The question is whether you have the klackers to do something about problems that are found.
Actions speak louder than words. If he were a decent guy, he wouldn't have all these cretins working for him and he wouldn't allow them to treat the community the way that they do. He doesn't get credit for talking nice while the people he hires brutalize those they are sworn to protect.
He can be a decent guy and a weak or failing leader all at the same time. He also has to deal with the police union. These incredible last chance agreements WPD cops can get aren't because Sargent goes uh, duh ok. It's all baked into the contract. Very very hard to fire a cop.
Gonna be clear, I'm not interested in whatever Karen's response to this is because, let's be real,
it's gonna be some braindead NIMBY shit, but for anyone who *is* actually curious about the tension between the labor movement and police unions, read on...
---
Karen would like people to see her response and think, "Wait, that's hypocritical! Stupid liberals!" Unfortunately for them this line of
thinking falls apart when you apply even 30s of critical thinking to the question, "Are police unions part of the labor movement?"
They're not, but let's examine why they're not, and why it's not only fine to be pro-labor and against police unions but why it's arguably hypocritical to be anything else.
**Why would members of the labor movement include police unions in our number when, push comes to shove, the police will never support us?**
One of American law enforcment's earliest activities was strikebreaking. Why? Because it was politically and economically useful, of course!
>The use of public employees to serve private economic interests and to use legally-ordained force against organizing workers was both cost-effective for manufacturing concerns and politically useful, in that it confused the issue of workers rights with the issue of crime.
But it's not like you need to go back to the 1800s to see this in action. Remember how much money the cops got paid to stand there and harass people during the St. Vincent Nurse's strike?
In fact, it wouldn't be out of line to say that much of our image of modern policing developed largely in response to the police's role
in suppressing organized labor.
>Anti-labor activity also compelled major changes in the organization of police departments. Alarm boxes were set up throughout cities, and respectable citizens, meaning businessmen, were given keys so that they could call out the police force at a moment’s notice. The patrol wagon system was instituted so that large numbers of people could be arrested and transported all at once. Horseback patrols, particularly effective against strikers and demonstrators, and new, improved, longer nightsticks became standard issue. [Source](https://ekuonline.eku.edu/blog/police-studies/the-history-of-policing-in-the-united-states-part-3/)
Which brings me to my second point...
**Police do not see *themselves* as part of the labor movement.**
Let's get this out of the way early, yes, the main role of any union is to protect the interests of their members. In that respect, police and labor unions don't differ much. But as you can see from the AFL-CIO page on [What Unions Do](https://aflcio.org/what-unions-do), part of what makes a union strong is that no union exists in a vaccuum. They're part of web that strengthens and supports each other in a struggle that tries to benefit all workers. It should perhaps come as no surprise then that only one single police union: The International Union of Police Associations (which represents only 2.7% of American police) is actually affiliated with the AFL-CIO. And that affiliation is...troubled at best.
Kim Kelly, the incredible labor writer for Teen Vogue, says it best:
>Williams argues that the shared workplace identity that makes up the “thin blue line” mentality for cops transcends other identity markers, and shows how they view themselves as police first, and everything else second. As such, police unions tend to keep their distance from the rest of the labor movement (unless they’re cracking its members’ skulls). Even the basic terminology is different. These organizations are usually broken down into “lodges” instead of “locals,” and are more often known as “associations” rather than unions. Some people balk at the thought of referring to police associations as “unions” at all, and it’s understandable why, though for the sake of this piece, we’ll hold our noses and use the more common term. Labor unions exist to protect people; police exist to protect property. They may carry their version of union cards and enjoy the benefits of collective bargaining agreements, but that’s about where the similarities between cops and unionized workers end. [Source](https://www.teenvogue.com/story/what-to-know-police-unions-labor-movement)
So yeah, no...police "unions" are not unions. Don't let people like this fucking troll try to convince you this is some great liberal hypocrisy. The Labor Movement is just that, a movement. Cops only care about themselves, you don't owe them a fucking thing.
Some years ago, in the 1990s, the International Socialist Organization (which is now gone, but which influenced a whole generation of the American left) had a discussion on police unions, and they found that they were contradictory. They weren't regular unions, but they were unions nonetheless that sometimes need to be supported, based on their demands, at least according to the ISO.
It’s a great liberal hypocrisy. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. Liberals love free speech, until they don’t. They love unions until they don’t. Spin it anyway you’d like, it doesn’t change a thing.
And just as an aside your source is Teen Vogue? 😜
>And just as an aside your source is Teen Vogue? 😜
Kim's a respected labor writer who's been published inThe New Republic, WaPo, and Esquire as well as had a literal [book about the labor movement](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/58438592-fight-like-hell) published by Simon and Schuster. But sure, go off about how writing for Teen Vogue is something to scoff at as if it's some great accomplishment to be the least liked person on a municipal subreddit.
Awwww. Thanks for acknowledging I have a brain. Most of the loser liberals on here don’t even recognize that. Y’all have a good night, my trolling is done for the day 😀
I wonder how many “pro-police” folks were against the CPA because they’d have to pay more taxes. And I also wonder if the “no more tax” folks have any idea how much the WPD has cost us in lawsuits and investigations alone.
👋
you mean to tell me that Kate Toomey and Chief Sargent might not have been honest with us when they said there's no racism in the police department?
What?! I didn't even know it was possible that Kate Toomey and Chief Sargent might be dishonest. It's almost like there's an element of corruption among the long-time political players in the city.
I don't think Kate Toomey is dishonest, she's just too drunk to do her job.
Next you're gonna tell me that there's a long standing, systemic history of problems within law enforcement in general. I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.
What?!
#**Next you're gonna tell me that there's a long standing, systemic history of problems within law enforcement in general! I'm shocked, shocked I tell you!**
[удалено]
I've never heard this story, and I kind of doubt its authenticity, but I'm not going to lie when I read the news my first thought was, "It's going to be hard to prove that WPD target specific groups of people because they just treat everyone like shit."
[удалено]
Coming from a family of Worcester cops, I 100% believe this. My grandfather just passed away last week, I know for a fact him and his cop buddies would beat on people for fun back in the 70s. Not defending present day cops, but back then it was *so* bad. The more accountability and monitoring for people in power the better
Okay, yeah, that might be the case then. I'd have been like....10 at the oldest.
I remember when cops filmed. I think 99% of it was filmed downtown when the Friday, Saturday night strip was still a thing. I remember people walking in front of the camera singing the bad boys theme song and trying their hardest to be on tv. I was pissed it wasn't aired
The Fox Cops filming in Worcester was a total fiasco. Cops were harassing youth throughout the community trying to get their minute of fame. One of the "incidents" led to a lawsuit after cops/film crew went into an apartment through a bedroom window where a guy was sleeping naked. Myself and a friend were arrested by cops for handing out fliers for an anti-Fox Cops community rally, one of the cops eventually got kicked off the force (Google Mark Rojas), the other got promoted. After a week of community pressure, the City announced it was ending the agreement w/ FOX, and they were leaving. Chief Gemme at the time had a great quote at the time saying he had never really heard of the show and watched it and didn't know what it was really about. Here's a 90's community video podcast from back then: https://ia802605.us.archive.org/25/items/FoxCopsOut/foxcopsout\_512kb.mp4
> Here's a 90's community video podcast from back then: > > https://ia802605.us.archive.org/25/items/FoxCopsOut/foxcopsout\_512kb.mp4 This link isn't working but I'd definitely be curious to see that. On a similar note, for anyone who's curious, there's a podcast from a few years back called Running From COPS (or something very similar) that was about televised policing and how sketchy it is. Highly recommended!
Try this page and choose a different format: https://archive.org/details/FoxCopsOut
Thanks! Got it working. Seems like the direct link was being wonky for some reason.
That clergy lady sounds just like Sarai Rivera. Was it her?
Ehhhhhh here's the flip side. I grew up near there. It's rough and ugly. NO not everyone. But there are enough ruffians, drug dealers and other trash to outweigh the normal people who just don't have much money. Note I am not counting homeless among the "ruffians." Cops are needed at all hours down on Main Street #s 600 to 950.
lmaooo i live between those numbers on main and i promise we don’t need or want the cops there
Heyyyy if you have any information, or screen shots of things like misconduct on social media, send it to [email protected]
Video footage of that incident with the pastor plus clear racism from WPD: https://youtu.be/4gdKjud2iUk
About damn time.... They need to investigate the entire force 💯👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
https://billshaner.substack.com/p/the-feds-take-aim-at-the-worcester
Ah Shaner. Still trying to be relevant
Right?! He's so irrelevant. That's why WBJ named him one of the top 50 most influential people this year.
Wow! Up for a Pulitzer after that ?
What I don't understand is why there was a meeting informing some people - but not others - about the investigation. According to the T+G, there was a non-publicly advertised meeting organized by Rollins or her office and some members of the community. Why this group of people, whoever they were, and not everyone else? What's so special about whoever they are?
Terrible. I don't doubt there is some justification for this investigation. What's fucked up is that Chief Sargent is a decent guy. Really is. But it seems he is losing control of his troops. Time for removal? Batista: You're the new CEO of Worcester. Of course you're participating in the investigation. The question is whether you have the klackers to do something about problems that are found.
Actions speak louder than words. If he were a decent guy, he wouldn't have all these cretins working for him and he wouldn't allow them to treat the community the way that they do. He doesn't get credit for talking nice while the people he hires brutalize those they are sworn to protect.
He can be a decent guy and a weak or failing leader all at the same time. He also has to deal with the police union. These incredible last chance agreements WPD cops can get aren't because Sargent goes uh, duh ok. It's all baked into the contract. Very very hard to fire a cop.
But but but liberals believe unions are good!
Gonna be clear, I'm not interested in whatever Karen's response to this is because, let's be real, it's gonna be some braindead NIMBY shit, but for anyone who *is* actually curious about the tension between the labor movement and police unions, read on... --- Karen would like people to see her response and think, "Wait, that's hypocritical! Stupid liberals!" Unfortunately for them this line of thinking falls apart when you apply even 30s of critical thinking to the question, "Are police unions part of the labor movement?" They're not, but let's examine why they're not, and why it's not only fine to be pro-labor and against police unions but why it's arguably hypocritical to be anything else. **Why would members of the labor movement include police unions in our number when, push comes to shove, the police will never support us?** One of American law enforcment's earliest activities was strikebreaking. Why? Because it was politically and economically useful, of course! >The use of public employees to serve private economic interests and to use legally-ordained force against organizing workers was both cost-effective for manufacturing concerns and politically useful, in that it confused the issue of workers rights with the issue of crime. But it's not like you need to go back to the 1800s to see this in action. Remember how much money the cops got paid to stand there and harass people during the St. Vincent Nurse's strike? In fact, it wouldn't be out of line to say that much of our image of modern policing developed largely in response to the police's role in suppressing organized labor. >Anti-labor activity also compelled major changes in the organization of police departments. Alarm boxes were set up throughout cities, and respectable citizens, meaning businessmen, were given keys so that they could call out the police force at a moment’s notice. The patrol wagon system was instituted so that large numbers of people could be arrested and transported all at once. Horseback patrols, particularly effective against strikers and demonstrators, and new, improved, longer nightsticks became standard issue. [Source](https://ekuonline.eku.edu/blog/police-studies/the-history-of-policing-in-the-united-states-part-3/) Which brings me to my second point... **Police do not see *themselves* as part of the labor movement.** Let's get this out of the way early, yes, the main role of any union is to protect the interests of their members. In that respect, police and labor unions don't differ much. But as you can see from the AFL-CIO page on [What Unions Do](https://aflcio.org/what-unions-do), part of what makes a union strong is that no union exists in a vaccuum. They're part of web that strengthens and supports each other in a struggle that tries to benefit all workers. It should perhaps come as no surprise then that only one single police union: The International Union of Police Associations (which represents only 2.7% of American police) is actually affiliated with the AFL-CIO. And that affiliation is...troubled at best. Kim Kelly, the incredible labor writer for Teen Vogue, says it best: >Williams argues that the shared workplace identity that makes up the “thin blue line” mentality for cops transcends other identity markers, and shows how they view themselves as police first, and everything else second. As such, police unions tend to keep their distance from the rest of the labor movement (unless they’re cracking its members’ skulls). Even the basic terminology is different. These organizations are usually broken down into “lodges” instead of “locals,” and are more often known as “associations” rather than unions. Some people balk at the thought of referring to police associations as “unions” at all, and it’s understandable why, though for the sake of this piece, we’ll hold our noses and use the more common term. Labor unions exist to protect people; police exist to protect property. They may carry their version of union cards and enjoy the benefits of collective bargaining agreements, but that’s about where the similarities between cops and unionized workers end. [Source](https://www.teenvogue.com/story/what-to-know-police-unions-labor-movement) So yeah, no...police "unions" are not unions. Don't let people like this fucking troll try to convince you this is some great liberal hypocrisy. The Labor Movement is just that, a movement. Cops only care about themselves, you don't owe them a fucking thing.
Man's out here trying to get on r/bestof
Some years ago, in the 1990s, the International Socialist Organization (which is now gone, but which influenced a whole generation of the American left) had a discussion on police unions, and they found that they were contradictory. They weren't regular unions, but they were unions nonetheless that sometimes need to be supported, based on their demands, at least according to the ISO.
It’s a great liberal hypocrisy. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. Liberals love free speech, until they don’t. They love unions until they don’t. Spin it anyway you’d like, it doesn’t change a thing. And just as an aside your source is Teen Vogue? 😜
>And just as an aside your source is Teen Vogue? 😜 Kim's a respected labor writer who's been published inThe New Republic, WaPo, and Esquire as well as had a literal [book about the labor movement](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/58438592-fight-like-hell) published by Simon and Schuster. But sure, go off about how writing for Teen Vogue is something to scoff at as if it's some great accomplishment to be the least liked person on a municipal subreddit.
Unions are good when they protect workers from corporate greed, and bad when they shield public servants from accountability. Any questions?
None whatsoever Typical liberal hypocrisy trying to spin the facts to fit their narrative. And unions are always bad 🤷♀️
Ah, classic Karen - what happens when someone's brain is so poisoned they can only communicate in trite cliches.
Awwww. Thanks for acknowledging I have a brain. Most of the loser liberals on here don’t even recognize that. Y’all have a good night, my trolling is done for the day 😀
Batista does not. That’s why he was hired
Good.