No snitching! Opinions?

[Lauderdalle]

So this isn't so hard to find, but in all communities, crime is a reaccurring issue. However, some communities (such as my own) hold this "principle" that snitching will get you shunned, no one will trust you, dadadadadda. I personally disagree heavily with said moral because this does nothing but help and reassure that the criminal can do what they want, and it's just effectively enabling and silencing those affected by crime, or those who can support said victims. And in some cases, "snitching" gets you called out and shunned by those you love. So NSG, what are your thoughts on this snitching principle?

[Floofybit]

If someone commits an action they shouldn't be free from the consequences. Snitching should be commended.

[Lauderdalle]

If someone commits an action they shouldn't be free from the consequences. Snitching should be commended.

My issue with this common practice is that if I do anything, I can get away with it. Here's a scenario;

*robs house*

Oh my god! We got robbed, we have to report it.

Nah you're a snitch. Nobody wanna be friends with a snitch.

Oh...

This is a huge oversimplification but it kind of dums down to this.

EDIT: Fixed failed BBCode

[Ivartixi]

If someone commits an action they shouldn't be free from the consequences. Snitching should be commended.

You know the saying.
"Snitches get stitches!"
me don't like snitches

[Floofybit]

If someone commits an action they shouldn't be free from the consequences. Snitching should be commended.

My issue with this common practice is that if I do anything, I can get away with it. Here's a scenario;

*robs house*

Oh my god! We got robbed, we have to report it.

Nah you're a snitch. Nobody wanna be friends with a snitch.

Oh...

This is a huge oversimplification but it kind of dums down to this.

EDIT: Fixed failed BBCode

Yup. It is imperative for the stigma against snitching to be removed.

[Bradfordville]

You don't snitch because otherwise the people you ratted out might kill your family. It has nothing to do with some "code" in the community and everything to do with gangs having a reign of terror.

[Dumb Ideologies]

Except in the most severe cases I wouldn't inform on family or a friend. Might inform on someone I really don't like, but engaging with the system could end up being time-consuming or stressful so there's still a bit of a bar. If there's reason to fear reprisals, I saw nothing.

[Parmistan]

The problem with snitching is that the police are frequently not acting in the best interests of the community, and open or covert collaboration with them can have dire consequences on friends and loved ones. Cops very VERY rarely actually solve crimes, most of what they do is patrolling looking for trouble or easy arrests, running up dudes for nonviolent offenses and petty shit to pad their numbers and feel tough.

Involving the cops is inviting a poorly trained bully with a gun and giving him absolute authority to change the situation any way he chooses. If you find yourself in a scenario where that sounds like an IMPROVEMENT, you've already got BIG problems.

[Floofybit]

You don't snitch because otherwise the people you ratted out might kill your family. It has nothing to do with some "code" in the community and everything to do with gangs having a reign of terror.

Which is why we need a stronger police force and surveillance. Anything to let the government crack down on gang violence and implement a safer, public environment.

[Lauderdalle]

You don't snitch because otherwise the people you ratted out might kill your family. It has nothing to do with some "code" in the community and everything to do with gangs having a reign of terror.

Ngl, I didn't think of that.

[Bradfordville]

You don't snitch because otherwise the people you ratted out might kill your family. It has nothing to do with some "code" in the community and everything to do with gangs having a reign of terror.

Which is why we need a stronger police force and surveillance. Anything to let the government crack down on gang violence and implement a safer, public environment.

No, because the government is even worse than them, and Harder to hold accountable.

[Serloin]

"snitching" when its about a crime isnt snitching, its informing the police/government. snitching is telling secrets or tattling on someone in school, unimportant stuff. when its like crimes or robberies, every detail counts

[Gravlen]

In a functioning society this would not be an issue at all.

In a dysfunctional society, it's a thing because of the threat of retribution from the criminals you might snitch on, and it's also a thing because of the threat dangerously incompetent, racist and overzealous law enforcement operatives pose.

My issue with this common practice is that if I do anything, I can get away with it. Here's a scenario;

*robs house*

Oh my god! We got robbed, we have to report it.

Nah you're a snitch. Nobody wanna be friends with a snitch.

Oh...

This is a huge oversimplification but it kind of dums down to this.

Here's another scenario:
You think you observe a house being robbed. You call 911 and let the police know. The police come out to check, and then shoot the homeowner dead.

Body camera footage released by the Fort Worth Police Department shows that two officers had walked quietly around the side of the home. Officer Aaron Dean had walked into Jefferson's backyard. Seeing Jefferson in the window of her home, the officer yelled "put your hands up! Show me your hands!" and then fired a single shot through Jefferson's window.

Describing the video, the BBC wrote that Dean fired "within seconds" of seeing Jefferson. The BBC also wrote that the footage does not appear to show police identifying themselves or whether she was armed.The footage also does not show any indication if Dean could see the gun that Jefferson held, as the view through the window was obstructed by the reflection from his flashlight. The officer partnered with Dean told authorities that she could only see Jefferson's face through the window.

Or maybe the just go to the wrong adress - and shot the homeowner dead.

When you have law enforcement officers who care more about looking good on television than following protocols, it's no wonder you use SWAT to raid the wrong home and end up murdering a sleeping seven-year old.

And if we disregard helpful mental health checks which end in the police burning the patient alive - oops, sorry, that's not the story I was thinking of, I was supposed to link this story of the police burning the patient alive during a wellness check, and firing another taser at him while he is on fire.. Easy mistake to make, you know? Hard to keep track of all the stories, though the one with the police officer called Nazi is memorable for all the wrong reasons.

Not to mention the thousands of stories of the police destroying property, or killing non-threatening pets, or just being a menace.

[Glorious Freedonia]

A person with a criminal mind does not take responsibility for their actions. If you get a bunch of like criminal-minded people communicating with each other in an echo chamber you will get ideas universally agreed upon that snitches are the problem not the criminals. You live in a criminally minded community that blames the victim instead of the perpetrator. I bet things are all quite illogical, disordered, and lousy in your community because this type of thinking leads to all kinds of disorganization.

[Saiwana]

If I remember right, there was a Boondocks episode where Riley Freeman was big on the "no snitching" rule but was devastated by his bike being stolen. He had no recourse for getting it back if he kept to his self imposed rule. The thieves mocked him by saying "thank you for not snitching!"

The problem is when not telling only benefits whoever did something that shouldn't be free of consequences. If they won't stop, someone somewhere should probably just admit what is happening so it can end or be addressed, and not just escalate towards actions everybody else will suffer from.

[Technoscience Leftwing]

There are laws that serve not society, but the ruling class. First of all, these are laws directed against political opponents. In this case, denunciation is part of the mechanism of political repression. The question comes down to this: Do we consider the bureaucracy, the police and the court to be an impartial arbiter of the interests of the majority of citizens, or a biased, self-serving tool in the hands of a few rich people? It often acts as an instrument of masters, and therefore, whenever possible, we must try to solve problems without it intervention.

[Lauderdalle]

There are laws that serve not society, but the ruling class. First of all, these are laws directed against political opponents. In this case, denunciation is part of the mechanism of political repression. The question comes down to this: Do we consider the bureaucracy, the police and the court to be an impartial arbiter of the interests of the majority of citizens, or a biased, self-serving tool in the hands of a few rich people? She often acts as an instrument of masters, and therefore, whenever possible, we must try to solve problems without her intervention.

However, the issue is not so much that they don't inform the authorities, but because they don't do anything about it. They keep it to themselves, and that's wrong. It's like they're putting the responsibility on the victim to stay silent or worse will happen.

[Technoscience Leftwing]

There are laws that serve not society, but the ruling class. First of all, these are laws directed against political opponents. In this case, denunciation is part of the mechanism of political repression. The question comes down to this: Do we consider the bureaucracy, the police and the court to be an impartial arbiter of the interests of the majority of citizens, or a biased, self-serving tool in the hands of a few rich people? She often acts as an instrument of masters, and therefore, whenever possible, we must try to solve problems without her intervention.

However, the issue is not so much that they don't inform the authorities, but because they don't do anything about it. They keep it to themselves, and that's wrong. It's like they're putting the responsibility on the victim to stay silent or worse will happen.

Yes. That is, the problem is the social atomization of citizens, their inability to self-organize without officials.

[Stellar Colonies]

”Snitches get rewards.”
- Garcetti

Probably the dumbest part of that phrase was not thinking of using “riches”.

[Lauderdalle]

Which is why we need a stronger police force and surveillance. Anything to let the government crack down on gang violence and implement a safer, public environment.

No, because the government is even worse than them, and Harder to hold accountable.

What's your solution(s)?

[Kashimura]

Depends on if I like them. Family, friends, and neighbors within about 8 houses of me might get a pass depending on the severity of the crime. Beyond that, my trust is squarely with the county police. If they wanna run it up the ladder, that’s their call, but I’m not as fond of the state police. In general, yes, I would report a crime to the authorities and advise others to.

[Ivartixi]

”Snitches get rewards.”
- Garcetti

Probably the dumbest part of that phrase was not thinking of using “riches”.

No, "Snitches get stitches".

[Lauderdalle]

”Snitches get rewards.”
- Garcetti

Probably the dumbest part of that phrase was not thinking of using “riches”.

No, "Snitches get stitches".

Do you believe this?

[Ivartixi]

No, "Snitches get stitches".

Do you believe this?

yes, your sister snitches on you?
What would i do?
Beat her up.

[Bienenhalde]

yes, your sister snitches on you?
What would i do?
Beat her up.

Why should I retaliate if she did the right thing?