Omaha police agreed this week to stop carrying gloves that can deliver electric shocks to students in the halls of Nebraska’s largest public school district.

The decision affecting most Omaha middle and high schools came after The Associated Press first revealed Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s plan to give officers the gloves, which are known as G.L.O.V.E.s or Generated Low Output Voltage Emitters. The devices have also been used in recent years by some jails.

Omaha Superintendent Matthew Ray requested that police working in the schools, known as school resource officers, stop using the gloves. Omaha Police agreed.

  • Talcosis@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    You know, one thing I never understood about fantasy settings where stuff is around for “thousands of years”, is that in reality, something that has been around for less than 200 years can be considered eternal by someone unwilling to think about it.

    • HCSOThrowaway@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      Nope; the oldest written record of law enforcement is around 4,000 years old.

      Sorry to hear you aren’t particularly well-educated on the topic. Maybe don’t engage in conversations about things you don’t know much about? That’s what I try to do, and it works pretty well. But you probably don’t care about accuracy about such matters.

      I hope I never speak with such misplaced authority about issues you have a degree in.

      • Talcosis@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        brings “evidence” not of law enforcement, but of maybe a code of laws, but also same article mentions that most experts no longer consider it as such.

        Calls me names for not recognizing it as evidence of law enforcement, much like most experts in the subject (like your article says). Enforcement isn’t even mentioned.

        I wouldn’t talk about misplaced authority if I was you. Maybe stick to crayons.

        • HCSOThrowaway@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          brings “evidence” not of law enforcement, but of maybe a code of laws, but also same article mentions that most experts no longer consider it as such.

          So you think those were just suggestions? Even the jurisprudence theory that’s gained recent steam still heavily implies there were laws, and again, laws are generally not just polite suggestions.

          Calls me names for not recognizing it as evidence of law enforcement, much like most experts in the subject (like your article says). Enforcement isn’t even mentioned.

          What name(s) did I call you?

          I wouldn’t talk about misplaced authority if I was you.

          Why not?

          Maybe stick to crayons.

          I’m not an expert on crayons. Are you?

          • Talcosis@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Do you have any evidence that there was a law enforcement arm that went around and actively did law enforcement in a professional capacity? No?

            Then your code of Hammurabi is irrelevant.

              • Talcosis@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                So you’re saying that any attempt at jurisprudence is equivalent to a professional cadre of law enforcement employed by the state. Laws have been around for a long time, laws aren’t the problem. Law enforcement has only been around for like, 150ish years. Law enforcement is the thing causing problems.

                I’d say that’s a motte and bailey, because you seem to know fallacies, but based on your use of no true scotsman I think occams razor comes into play.

                Now that there is an ad hominem. And it’s still valid, because you did not provide an argument. You just did an ad hominem at me.

                • HCSOThrowaway@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  So you’re saying that any attempt at jurisprudence is equivalent to a professional cadre of law enforcement employed by the state.

                  How very Straw Man of you.

                  Laws have been around for a long time, laws aren’t the problem. Law enforcement has only been around for like, 150ish years. Law enforcement is the thing causing problems.

                  Again, you seem to think that people bothered to write laws down without enforcing them for some reason.

                  Now that there is an ad hominem. And it’s still valid, because you did not provide an argument. You just did an ad hominem at me.

                  Nope. What about your person did I attack (in order to distract from the actual discussion)?

                  • Talcosis@lemmy.zip
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    Yes. People wrote down laws with no professional law enforcement. Unless you can show me the presence of professional law enforcement, “trust me bro” isn’t evidence.

                    The first evidence of professional law enforcement starts around the 1830s.