Clearly to hand out speeding tickets /s

It should in fact be the default stance to take when lacking information.

Well I’d certainly say they dodged a bullet

It looks like a lot of this comes down to who was where and when. Officer 2 seems like the “bad cop” that Officer 1 should’ve chastised, and then Crutchfield arrived after the fact and was upset with Officer 2, likely per 1’s testimony – if I’m understanding correctly.

If it was just Officer 1 and Officer 2 that were responding at first, I think this touches on a different issue actually. Officer 1 can’t properly restrain Officer 2 if 1 also has to handle an unruly suspect. If both of them have their hands full, one officer can’t keep the other in check. Perhaps this highlights that in an ideal situation, you have at least 1 extra officer than is necessary for the scenario. The extra officer would then be free to intervene and stop bad cops.

This is an inherent problem with the concept of free information. I would love universal and free information, but that doesn’t take into consideration that quality information requires labor. Wikipedia isn’t free of that either, the labor is just largely unpaid.

At the end of the day, we need to pay journalists, editors, curators, and contributors. If you want quality news, you need quality people. And to get quality people, you need generous compensation, whether that comes from subscriptions, advertisements, or taxes.

I question a lot of the choices they’ve made in the opinion section, and which letters from politicians to publish, but it can’t be understated that OP/EDs are totally separate from everything else.

This is a fairly good bellwether to see who’s progressive and who’s a champagne socialist.

The ones who have that position because they provided capital or such really have nothing left to offer. And I bet that actually really bothers these venture capitalists. They have no use other than their money. When they try to show that they do, they prove that they don’t.