This is an indication of a systemic failure. And a human failure. Both.

But be thankful that you have the system that you have. In China, 99.97% of people arrested are convicted. The police use torture systematically to obtain confessions. Sometimes female suspects will be imprisoned with known rapists.

Be thankful that we're even having a discussion about systemic failure with the Flock database error.

You're inserting advocacy research (which is not reality seeking) into a case where the facts are already pretty clear.

About 20 are unarmed people.

About 8 of those unarmed people are actively attacking the police officer.

Of the remaining 12 -- some were escaping, some were attacking someone else, ..., and a proportion were genuinely innocent people.


This idea that "1/3" of people killed by strangers are killed by police is classic massaging the date, because almost every person who is killed or murdered is done so by someone they know.

The police are continually reforming. We need more reform. We also need a reality based discussion.

Data entry mistakes happen. What is worrying is that it wasn't corrected the first time she was pulled over. Also, the police should have issued an apology. It's the morally correct thing to do; however, I suspect they have legal advise specifically NOT to do this because of ambulance chasing lawyers. Nonetheless there is absolutely a systemic failure here that needs to be addressed.

A mistake was still made, in that the entry should have been removed from the database the first time.

PoliceViolenceReport -- an advocacy organization btw -- reports 2x fatal police incidents. So, since 2017, we have about 15 per year instead of 7. So you're way over your skiis. Did you read the "excellent data"?

And it isn't apples-to-apples. Because PoliceViolenceReport is measuring a different *thing*. We're no longer looking at just shootings, but other types of fatal incidents, such as the use of police vehicles.

The Washington Post reviewed shootings of unarmed individuals, and found 40% (!) were physically attacking the officer in question.

When it comes to HARMLESS people SHOT by policy, PoliceViolenceReport and the Washington Post agree.

That means that YOUR SOURCE agrees with the OP.

If there were really justice in this world

I get your point and I agree in principle.

$100M? Really?

Btw, if this were china, they have a 99.97% conviction rate. The police arrest someone. They are tortured until they confess. 3 in 1000 escape prison.

For all its flaws, be thankful that we live in a system that we have. A $100M lawsuit would not make it better, unless most of it went to pay defendants legal fees. We also need way more judges. Like 10x as many judges.

How? The net result: we are $1.2B poorer. Are you doing accounting for DOGE?

Why do you need all these features (apart from the remote start)? Just use CarPlay/AA.

There's so much excess bullshit in Texas they could dry it and burn it to power data centers.

It's part of the bullshit-in/bullshit-out AI bubble.

So 100% accurate replication of C-suite and board of directors IRL behavior.

Think of all the money that could be saved if that class was replaced by AI and their grift was invested in the well-being of normal humans. We could achieve the AI economy that could free so many people from grinding poverty and get a science fiction utopia.

Unfortunately we're going to get the Morloch/Eloi dystopia of H. G. Wells Time Machine, except the elites will consume the underclass. Think of the more recent Harkonnens in Dune.

Look no further then every Trump/DOJ revenge prosecution in the last year, along with the ICE/gestapo masked anonymous death squads, and the concentration camps being built all over the country.

Example: relatives of the NYT reporters who broke the story on the Qatar Trump 747 bribe aircraft being unsafe had their phone records subpoenaed by the FBI.

Don't forget that you are paying for all of it and it's going to get far worse real soon.

What's the going bribery rate for a $7 billion contract?

No matter what Ellison comes out personally richer while the rest of us pay the bill.

It has nothing to do with being cowards, they are robots. It's a case of saving a little money at the expense of being excluded from a lot of money.

Piracy laws are very effective... for curbing intentional piracy in businesses because they have too much to lose to break laws like these and they are basically robots with instructions to follow the law.

But they won't outlaw these, what they'd do is prohibit companies that use them from government work/contracts and the government gives away WAY too much of our money to give that up.