this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2025
818 points (98.9% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

12947 readers
1330 users here now

Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title

--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article

--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The NYPD is skulking through the L train demanding IDs from Black and Latino men, again with zero justified cause or explanation as to why.

Source

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 day ago

"Vhere are your papers??"

[–] Ileftreddit@lemmy.world 3 points 21 hours ago

The times become dangerous when the state loses it’s monopoly on violence

[–] lmdnw@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

ACAB. They’ll never change if our only resistance is peaceful. No significant swing in power between a people and its government has occurred absent of violence.

[–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 2 points 21 hours ago

Where are all the posters who are trying to assuage their guilt for their own inaction by telling you why you're wrong and defensively calling you a keyboard warrior? Is this even Lemmy?

[–] badbytes@lemmy.world 33 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Bad policing is bad for good cops.

[–] Pilferjinx@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Good cops? You mean the ones that stand and watch the bad cops?

The good cop that get beaten by fellow officers: https://sh.itjust.works/post/41445902

[–] whoisearth@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Sigh. The responses you got really dishearten me. We really are moving fast to a binary world where everything is good or bad and any opportunity for nuance is thrown out the window.

You are of course 100% correct.

[–] PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S@lemmy.sdf.org 22 points 1 day ago (10 children)

Well good thing there are no good cops 🅰️©️🆎

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] destructdisc@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] JargonWagon@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Hard disagree. My wife was stopped due to expired registration on our car - My fault, long story. The cop gave her a fix it ticket. Nothing else happened. They're a good cop, or at least they were in that moment.

You know what would have happened if they were a bad cop in that moment? She would have been deported for having brown skin.

Good cops don't make headlines, but they exist, and I'm grateful for the good ones we've encountered.

That being said, bad cops can fuck right off.

[–] wulrus@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Bad cops, even the worst of the worst, do a normal job 99% of the time. It's the other 1 % of their actions that have such a negative impact.

[–] FlockAdmiralEmu@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My dude, that cop did the bare minimum of their job. I don't believe that should be your definition of 'good'.

[–] JargonWagon@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Bare minimum would have been not pulling her over in the first place, or giving a warning. I've encountered cops in the past that ticketed me for things that I found out later I should not have been ticketed for, and they were dicks while they did it.

This wasn't the bare minimum, and they didn't abuse their power. Definitely wasn't a "bad cop".

[–] nomy@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago

Definitely wasn’t a “bad cop”.

But by virtue of being a cop, was a bastard.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] frenchfryenjoyer@lemmings.world 35 points 2 days ago (11 children)

I'm no expert on American law but I'm pretty sure you don't have to show ID unless you're given a good explanation for it.

ACAB

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

"Reasonable articulable suspicion", is the official way of saying that.

"A good explanation" is very undefined. The police has to have reasonable suspicion that the person has committed a crime, and they have to be able to articulate, ie explain that said reasonable suspicion of having committed a specific crime.

They just make it up all the time though, but most of the cops don't even seem to know the law. They just do what other cops do. And never have to take responsibility for breaking the law.

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So the 4th amendment of the US Constitution, which outlines the freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, protects people from being forced to verbally identify or show documents of identification without reasonable cause, among other things. What that has been interpreted to mean by the SCOTUS is that, while they can always request ID without it being a lawful order, a request you can deny without consequence, any policy or state/local ID law that requires identification upon officer request without any other reasonable cause is unlawful. In other words they cannot demand id for no actual reason nor punish you for failing to ID without said reason.

At minimum, they need "reasonable and articulable suspicion" of a real crime that has happened, is happening, or is about to happen, in order to legally require you to ID yourself in every state, district, and city in the country (with the exception of if you are driving a car and get pulled over for a lawful infraction, you must provide your license to prove you're allowed to drive the vehicle). "Reasonable and articulable suspicion" means that there are real facts that can be pointed to that a reasonable person would deem as a likely indication of crime, not hunches or racial profiling. Some states have higher levels of requirements in order to ID someone, but none can have lower requirements.

BUT, the unfortunate and infuriating truth is that they do not need to actually explain their reasonable and articulate suspicion to you at the time, which ultimately means that they dont have to have it until they justify it to the court much later. They could be just demanding it for no reason unlawfully. Or they could be demanding it because they just saw you pick pocket someone, or someone pointed you out as someone that threatened them, or you match the description of the person that just broke a bunch of windows nearby. All of those things qualify at reasonable suspicion allowing them to ID you in places where that is the minimum requirement. Even if you did nothing wrong, you could still match a description but aren't the right guy, or they thought that saw you do something unlawful but were actually mistaken. It doesn't matter. They still have reasonable suspicion unless you somehow factually dispel that suspicion. If you do not dispel that suspicion (maybe because they didn't even explain their reasons in the first place) and they demand ID, you can be lawfully required to present it even if you did absolutely nothing wrong and don't have a clue why they are asking at all.

In other words, if they demand ID and don't explain why, there's functionally way to discern at the time if the demand is lawful or unlawful even if you have committed no crimes. So you either comply or go to jail and argue your case in court later, regardless of the truth. And btw, even if they had absolutely no reasonable suspicion to lawfully demand ID at the time, they can just lie to justify it. If the lie is not demonstrably shown to be a lie by other evidence, it's assumed to be true. So... enjoy your "freedoms", I guess.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 116 points 2 days ago (8 children)

Reminder that there legally cannot be a crime such as "failure to provide identification" outside of specific contexts like actively operating a vehicle, etc. Lots of states allow cops to require you to provide your legal name (and sometimes address) when detained, and courts usually have the ability to compell the same.

Yeah actual laws as written don't matter.

This is fascism; the cop regime. They dont know or care about the laws, everything is vibes, and courts up to and especially the supreme will back them on this.

[–] catty@lemmy.world 61 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

In England, it's necessary to provide name and address when arrested, but, it's illegal for the police to arrest just to find out your name. But of course, how difficult is it for them to make up some asinine BS excuse?

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 70 points 2 days ago (8 children)

"I smell weed" has been a classic for decades.

A long while back, I was harassed by the cops for "acting suspicious" while waiting for some friends at the mall. This quickly escalated to "suspected terrorist activity" for absolutely no reason I could discern or anyone afterwards could explain.

Cops just say shit. The best you can do is say you need to speak to a lawyer and clam up after that.

[–] ultranaut@lemmy.world 36 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I had the cops try to pin a bunch of crimes on me and a few coworkers once. Thought my life was over for a few days because they were very serious allegations. Fortunately their police report was so ridiculous as soon as someone competent got involved the whole thing was immediately dropped. The claims they made had literally no evidence and multiple witnesses could prove they were lying. Cops 100% will say anything, it makes their job easier and there's no consequences.

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

If a cop says the sky is blue, maybe check.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] ByteJunk@lemmy.world 138 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Well played by these two bros.

Making them waste time and resources with nothing to show for it, plus standing up for those who can't. Respect.

[–] VitoRobles@lemmy.today 41 points 2 days ago

This is it honestly. When people slow down police/ICE, it creates a distraction.

When they're arresting grandmas and choking old people, causing a scene changes their focus and lets those people leave unharmed.

[–] SpicyLizards@reddthat.com 130 points 2 days ago

Bastards in blue doing what they do

[–] Cyberflunk@lemmy.world 36 points 2 days ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)

“Aren’t you a little short for a stormtrooper?”

[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_identify_statutes

Not exactly a new thing.

"Resonable Suspicion" is a lower threshold than "Probable Cause".

[–] KingGimpicus@sh.itjust.works 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Reasonable suspicion of a crime. You need to say the whole thing.

The number of cops that thinks "I've got reasonable suspicion of you being suspicious." Has always been too goddamn high. You need reasonable suspicion OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. Being suspicious isn't a crime. Being black or Latino in a subway station isn't a crime. Even stop and identify laws need to be based in reasonable suspicion of a crime because the 4th amendment demands it.

[–] verdantbanana@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

That is why cops have Terry Stops that allow them to fill in the reason as whatever and the judge always sides with the cops

load more comments
view more: next ›