[EQmWgw87pw]

This is such a common argument that’s basically a fallacy. Many of those dangerous jobs are dangerous because of human error. So it’s funny that you think 60% of deaths being on purpose is normal, what other job in the dangerous top 10 has 60% intentional deaths? Like seriously?

[atmavatar]

It's a common argument because police and their supporters regularly claim they need to roll up in tactical gear and treat every encounter with civilians like it's a life-and-death struggle because they have one of the most dangerous jobs, yet the truth is they have about an order of magnitude fewer workplace fatalities than roofers and loggers.

This is despite the fact that police regularly escalate their encounters, making them more dangerous for everyone, police included.

Maybe loggers need to start doing their jobs with miniguns like that scene in Predator.

[dpark]

> So it’s funny

They didn’t say it’s funny.

If you have something meaningful to say, then say it. Don’t twist someone else’s words instead.

> human error

Choosing to train police to act with an “warrior mindset” instead of training for de-escalation seems like it could be classified as human error, too.

[rocqua]

I think intentionally and willingly doing something whilst informed of the consequence doesn't count as human error. At least not in this context.

Though it would make more sense, since these humans are likely largely erroneous.

[dpark]

I agree. It’s actually systemic error.

Tens of thousands of no-knock raids every year in the us is crazy stuff. In the early 80s the number was ~1500/year. More than an order of magnitude increase in no knock raids while violent crime has fallen.

[EQmWgw87pw]

I didn’t say that they said it’s funny. I was saying it’s funny. You just twisted my words.