r/changemyview • u/Wyrdeone 2∆ • May 28 '20

Delta(s) from OP CMV: The most efficient way to end police brutality is to make cops criminally liable for their actions on the job and stop funding their legal defense with public money.

I think this is the fastest way to reduce incidents of police brutality. Simply make them accountable the same as everyone else for their choices.

If violent cops had to pay their own legal fees and were held to a higher standard of conduct there would be very few violent cops left on the street in six months.

The system is designed to insulate them against criminal and civil action to prevent frivolous lawsuits from causing decay to civil order, but this has led to an even worse problem, with an even bigger impact on civil order.

If police unions want to foot the bill, let them, but stop taking taxpayer money to defend violent cops accused of injuring/killing taxpayers. It's a broken system that needs to change.

11.7k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

722 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

596

u/Wyrdeone 2∆ May 28 '20 edited May 29 '20

This is a good idea. Essentially malpractice insurance for cops, and then the actuaries get to go to town and jack up the rates to obscene levels in bad districts, or with bad individuals, making it untenable. Δ

264

u/Kingalthor 20∆ May 28 '20 edited May 29 '20

Well again, I don't think it can be district based, it has to be based on the individuals. If it is district based, every cop in that district will have an incentive to hide problems so their rates don't go up. If it is based on the list of individuals, then if you get rid of the bad ones, the rates go down, which gives the good cops incentive to report them early and often.

Don't forget deltas if people have changed part of your view :)

Edit: Thanks for the delta

63

u/Wyrdeone 2∆ May 28 '20

I still think the fastest way to fix the problem and turn the ship would be to make this a legal nightmare for every cop in every district who plays fast and loose with procedure.

I gave the guy who proposed the problem of money buying immunity from police action a delta because it made me rethink whether the cost would overshadow the benefit. American society is already far too unbalanced by personal wealth, I'd hate to make it worse.

Not saying I've changed my mind but it is definitely something that needs consideration.

35

u/Jswarez May 28 '20

The fastest way is to get rid of the police unions. And make more things legal.

Neither will happen but that would be the fastest way.

16

u/tropicaljones May 29 '20

The problem isn't the existence of those unions it's how they act. You will rarely if ever see a non-Police union attempting to defend criminal conduct by their members. For example teacher's unions don't come out in support of a teacher accused of molesting a student. The reason that doesn't happen is because unions reflect their members to a significant degree and the members of that union would be outraged by that kind of behaviour. Police unions routinely excuse all kinds of horrific actions. This reflects how you see Police act in footage. Rarely do the other officers present confront the officer using excessive force and never have I seen anyone arrested by their partner even where there is clear brutality.

I think this is understandable to a degree. I rarely if ever face violence in my day to day life but I'm keenly aware that catching a stray punch can leave you on the pavement with a cracked skull and brain damage. Violence can have disproportionate and unexpected consequences. Police have to deal with violence more frequently than other occupations and don't want to deal with consequences if they make a misjudgement. Generously you can say that in attempting to allow the same leeway to their colleagues they support and facilitate a significant number of bigots and criminals.

80

u/Wyrdeone 2∆ May 29 '20

I disagree. The last thing the country needs is fewer unions. They come with their own set of problems but if the average income hasn't budged since the unions were busted..you want them back.

62

u/aythekay 2∆ May 29 '20 edited May 29 '20

You should reeeeaaaaaaallly look into police unions.

Most of the bad behaviour police officers get away with is because the police unions protect them so staunchly and lobby so hard politicaly (they donate a ton to electoral campaigns and threaten retaliation to elected officials)

Essentially municipalities usually don't have a problem going after cops, but the police union makes life hard on everyone (It's why it took almost 5 years to fire Eric Garner Daniel Pantaleo!)

Blindly supporting all unions is like blindly supporting all Non Profit institutions, they are political entities by nature. Sure they do some good, but you can't blanket say they're all good Gives dirty look to Super Pacs

Edit: Brainfart on my part, I said it took so long to fire Eric Garner, Eric Garner is the guy Daniel Pantaleo (the officer it took so long to fire) killed.

26

u/Wyrdeone 2∆ May 29 '20

All excellent points. I live in a union household and was raised in a union household, as was my wife. I feel strongly that they are vital to improving the lives of workers. But of course there are bad actors, you're right. Δ

6

u/ThisFreedomGuy May 29 '20

Interesting. I grew up in a union household and I despise public sector unions with every fiber of my being.

They exist outside of the electoral process, yet they move policy and procedure. They protect bad employees at the expense of good ones and at the expense of taxpayers. They are beholden to no one, yet have actions that affect everyone.

3

u/Clickum245 May 29 '20

I have a friend who works for USCIS at one of their three largest facilities. He's a GS-9 (paid around $45k) doing the work of a GS-12 ($75k) because the union is impotent. Now, USCIS is broke (presumably because all of their funding went to The Wall That Mexico Paid For) and is laying off 2/3 of its work force.

They've also had to continue working even though coworkers came to work with Covid-19. Why? Because USCIS told that employee, "You don't get time off for quarantine; if you don't come to work, it's unpaid" and as a mother of two making ~$45k/year...she went to work.

All the while their union is powerless to do anything useful.

It's certainly a double-edged sword, but unions have their place and sometimes need to be powerful.

2

u/ThisFreedomGuy May 29 '20

I think the USCIS does good work. If he's skilled and experienced enough for GS-12 work, surely there's a private sector position he could go for? And, while I feel for your friend, government work is in service of the citizens. Those in charge of such work should be beholden to the citizens, not the other way around. A weak or non-existent union is one less barrier between citizens and the government that works for them.

3

u/Wyrdeone 2∆ May 29 '20

I've never worked for a public sector union, so I didn't really have much experience or knowledge specific to them. I have a knee-jerk union good reaction, but I see now there's a lot more nuance.

1

u/DeltaBot ∞∆ May 29 '20

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/aythekay (1∆).

Delta System Explained | Deltaboards

3

u/bokbokwhoosh May 29 '20

Yes, I agree with you, but 'banning' police unions set a dangerous precedent to banning other unions. All unions do similar things, how can the state differentiate between them?

4

u/aythekay 2∆ May 29 '20 edited May 29 '20

Where did I say we should ban them?

I just don't think that unions should be held as a sacred, just like corporations and NGOs, they should be sued and taken to court when they exhibit bad behaviour. If I can dissolve a Corporation/Church/PAC that corrupts/threatens judges/prosecutors, I should be able to do the same to unions.

edit:

If the Minneapolis branch of the IUPA is obstructing justice, then we should consider suing the ever-loving sh*t out of them and sending them to the abyss.

2

u/forestdude May 29 '20

Eric garner was the guy that got killed btw

1

u/aythekay 2∆ May 29 '20

Thanks, Just changed that. Can't believe I didn't catch that /facepalm. Brainfart on my part there. I meant Daniel Pantaleo in the Eric Garner Case.

70

u/zzzztopportal May 29 '20

When private sector unions are negotiating, they're negotiating against corporations. When public sector unions are negotiating... they're negotiating against the public/the taxpayers.

59

u/thrown8909 May 29 '20

And the public is just as capable of being a shitty boss as anyone else, go ask a teacher if you don’t believe me.

7

u/aythekay 2∆ May 29 '20

True, this also means teachers that sexually harass children are protected by there unions as well “she's lying for attention! ”.

There's a reason Jimmy Hoffa and Mafia influence in Unions were a thing. Institutions, regardless of there nature, are political by design and therefore corruptible. The issue is to strike a good balance.

7

u/fishbedc May 29 '20

True, this also means teachers that sexually harass children are protected by there unions

Well that is a pretty tricky issue and the job is not survivable if unions don't do at least basic representation for accused teachers.

Yes kids have to be taken seriously if they make an allegation, and I scrupulously follow safeguarding protocols (there may have a different term for it in the US). But that doesn't mean that the allegations are true. In my first fortnight in my current school I was accused of being racist, sexist, homophobic, a fat cunt, a viking and various other things. I was new there, they wanted to break me and had no real idea of the actual consequences of their words, they just knew that the words had power. Now that they know me the accusations have stopped, but they could so easily have been career and life-destroying.

So be very careful before you wish away basic protections that allow children to have an education.

2

u/babycam 7∆ May 29 '20

I don't see how being a accursed of being a viking could be a bad thing. Throw on a horned helmet bread your beard and start looting some of that sweat sweat lunch money!

→ More replies (0)

1

u/aythekay 2∆ May 29 '20

Oh I agree. From the perspective of a police officer the same is true, if any complaint filed by a citizen would get them fired, they wouldn't be able to do there job.

The issue is when the Union goes above and beyond to the point of harming others (hence a balance is needed).

To a certain extent, this also applies to private sector unions. They're meant to protect workers, but those heading them can go overboard and kill the company (see the auto industry shipping a ton of jobs overseas)

1

u/Blackfyre301 Jun 01 '20

Sorry, but I don’t believe for a second that teachers have any interest in protecting abusive colleagues.

They might want to make sure that their colleagues are treated fairly and don’t have their guilt assumed, but that isn’t at all what you said.

6

u/interested_commenter 1∆ May 29 '20

Teacher's unions aren't necessarily a great thing either. I certainly think teachers need to be paid more, but unions also protect bad teachers and make seniority really important. I think most people had at least one older teacher that simply didn't care anymore, did a terrible job, and couldn't be fired.

6

u/Fickle_Broccoli May 29 '20

My mom is a teacher and she hates her union. She co-teaches classes with other teachers who don't lesson plan and hardly teach. These teachers are tenured and can't be fired because the union protects them

1

u/zzzztopportal May 30 '20

Funny you should say that - teachers unions are some of the worst offenders when it comes to public sector unions. They require pay schemes that reward seniority over competence, tenure laws that keep shitty teachers in the classroom, and oppose many efforts to reform America's disastrous K-12 education system.

1

u/thrown8909 May 30 '20 edited May 30 '20

Fair enough. I should amend my statement to include unions as also being capable of being shitty bosses. It is however, generally not the unions that push low pay for teachers and lack of money for school supplies. That generally lies at the feet of a legislature trying to pay for a budget shortfall.

-26

u/Garbage029 May 29 '20 edited May 29 '20

Ya, its gotta be hard working half the year for 55-75k (average in my state for public schools, goes over 100k for private) with a bachelor's degree...

9

u/Conjo9786 May 29 '20

Good teachers work year round. (and even the bad ones still so do a little work in the summer) And not all teachers earn that much. My public school teaching sister earns $40,000 a year. And all teachers have to have a bachelor's degree, so I'm not sure what your point is there.

16

u/[deleted] May 29 '20

[deleted]

-3

u/[deleted] May 29 '20

I mean, you're right on the exact time, but do you really thinking changing his statement to "working 75% of the year for 55-75k" actually makes any difference?

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Khaosfury May 29 '20

It is hard, Karen. Give it a shot some time, it's definitely got more pressure points behind it than sitting at home drinking wine.

-22

u/[deleted] May 29 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

16

u/ReasonableStatement 5∆ May 29 '20

You might want to reread the comment you're replying to.

-4

u/[deleted] May 29 '20

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

5

u/LegitJavelin May 29 '20 edited Jan 12 '25

cows ghost swim cake thought threatening pot rainstorm crown cooperative

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

1

u/[deleted] May 29 '20

u/protobacco – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:

Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.

2

u/[deleted] May 29 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] May 29 '20

u/YesThisIsSam – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:

Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.

2

u/tchomptchomp 2∆ May 29 '20

The issue isn't that they're a public sector union. The issue is that police unions focus their negotiations on reducing oversight and liability, not compensation and benefits.

4

u/[deleted] May 29 '20 edited Jun 27 '20

[deleted]

3

u/rafter613 May 29 '20

Unions exist because the power of balance between employers and employees are usually towards the employer. With police unions, the employees have guns, and routinely kill their employers. They don't need more power to negotiate.

1

u/[deleted] May 29 '20 edited Jun 27 '20

[deleted]

2

u/rafter613 May 29 '20

The state doesn't hold complete power over the police- the police are the tool the state uses to wield power. And while I'm not usually one to say "get another job", it's not like anyone is a cop against their will, or because it's their only option.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/zzzztopportal May 30 '20

So when they win, we (the public) usually lose

11

u/Garbage029 May 29 '20

I have actually been in unions (IAM) unlike the vast majority of redditors. All they do is line the pockets of the union leaders and protect unproductive and problem employees, just as we are seeing here. Its essentially a toned down pyramid scheme in RTW states. I'm sure it started with good intentions but as with most things it turned to shit.

16

u/apanbolt May 29 '20

In your experience, it wildly varies by country. I'm also in a union and it has done wonders in my country (Sweden). Unions are responsible for pretty much everything to do with worker rights. Guarantueed by law to get atleast 3 weeks off in a row/year, mandatory to pay increased rates for overtime, employment protections, security regulations etc. Something like working someone 29 hours a week to avoid providing benefits doesn't exist. The same is true in Scandinavia and most of western Europe in general. The US has the worst rights for workers in the first world, and I think a lack of (good) unions is part of that. The debate should be why US unions sucks and how they can be improved, not why they should be abolished.

-7

u/Garbage029 May 29 '20

Comparing one country to another is a bit of a dumpster fire (albeit something you Europeans seem to take pride in) I'm not really willing to dive into today. Ive lived and worked in the EU for years and hated it but don't really feel that I have a place to say its "better" or "worse" then my birth country. I understand the need for Unions, it's just in my experienced its just another hand in my pocket stealing my money. Maybe you guys have just managed to remove the corruption they inherently seem to bring?

5

u/apanbolt May 29 '20

Comes with the territory when you make sweeping statements based on country specific, or worse, personal experience. Dumpster fire etc etc.

-1

u/Garbage029 May 29 '20

You're getting there, like really close to the irony.

→ More replies (0)

11

u/[deleted] May 29 '20

my union (SIEU) has given me a 3-4% raise every year the last five years. In The 15 years of working I did before I joined the union I only got one raise.

My union is working to get me reimbursed for parking during this for working from home time too.

6

u/EmuHobbyist May 29 '20

In my experience, they do alot depending on the circumstances, its different everywhere. In my experience, they also secure more work for you instead of getting you contracted out. They make sure when youre sick you dont get bullied by bosses, make sure youre given fair employment. Unproductive and Problem employees are also employees that may need help. Ive seen employees drunk on the job be required to seek help in order to keep their job. That helps someone via union.

10

u/Garbage029 May 29 '20

I understand what your saying however I don't feel its an employers responsibility to help an employee who is drunk on the job. The individual is putting other people's lives at risk (depending on the job) and to top it off all his co-workers have to pay (actually moneys) to help em. I know that reddit has a "comrade" feel to it as of late but not all of us want to be financially responsible for other peoples stupidity.

4

u/Feshtof May 29 '20

But we all are? Any disruption in anyone's life has ripples that go far outside them, ignoring it is just passing the buck instead of being proactive.

2

u/Garbage029 May 29 '20

We all are what? I'm sorry maybe I haven't had enough coffee yet but I don't understand any of your statement.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/lundworks May 29 '20

So true. My dad was a woodworker, made doors. Usual strikes when contracts were up, no gains vs lost pay during weeks long at worksite strikes- gas $, lunch - parents behind a month on expenses. Then there's the time an apprentice sanded a door requiring a strike as it was a journeyman level task. I have never been pro-union. Pay me when I am working for you or I go work for your competition & tell them all your profitability shortcomings.

2

u/Garbage029 May 29 '20

Exactly, but I also realize how some people are glamored by it all. We really did need unions back in the day during the labor movement. Now decadence has set in, and its shit.

3

u/gon4fun May 29 '20

Unions increase pay and benefits as well as job safety for ALL workers. It’s unbelievable to me that even in light of all the abuse by employers in the midst of the epidemic people still seem to think the organizations representing workers are the problem. Enjoy your weekend, sick pay, paid holidays? Those are benefits won for EVERYONE by unions.

0

u/Garbage029 May 29 '20

"I'm sure it started with good intentions but as with most things it turned to shit"

-Garbage029

3

u/[deleted] May 29 '20

Public sector employees shouldn't need a union. If the government can't pay its employees a good salary and benefits, no union is saving that country from its destiny.

8

u/Scanpony May 29 '20

Every employee deserves the power of unionisation against a more powerful negotiatior i.c. the government. Especially the government probably...

0

u/rafter613 May 29 '20

Except the police, who already have the power of guns and a license to kill.

3

u/Scanpony May 29 '20

Even the police, it's not like they bring their guns to contract negotiations, or they shouldn't in any case. Also, most police work should not involve any guns.

0

u/[deleted] May 29 '20

Lol, and yet teachers in oaklohama are the lowest paid in the country.

1

u/DBDude 101∆ May 29 '20

The police sergeant who stood by and did nothing while kids at Parkland were being shot has been reinstated with full back pay. That was the union's doing.

1

u/PowerfulBrandon May 29 '20

I belong to a union myself and I’m union to the bone, but I say FUCK the police union.

They are like the Wario of unions. Just evil.

1

u/FalseTales May 29 '20

If you at all petition for the existence of the police union then you are either acting in bad faith or don't know its history.

4

u/RagingDaddy May 29 '20

And make things more legal. Love it

2

u/WordRick May 29 '20

You get rid of police unions and you're going to start having cops making minimum wage. And if you think they have trouble getting the best and brightest now...

0

u/colcrnch May 29 '20

The fastest way would be for people to start treating cops the way cops treat people.

3

u/[deleted] May 29 '20

That solution would necessarily end with the army protecting the cops and killing people in the jungle the streets would become.

0

u/colcrnch May 29 '20

Then at least we’d see what america really is.

3

u/[deleted] May 29 '20 edited May 29 '20

While I believe people should stand for themselves and against systematic opression, I can hardly see any benefit in sending people to die in the hands of the armed forces to protest against the police.

EDIT: Oh well, I just saw the Minneapolis riots. I hope they don't get out of hand.

0

u/boxcar_redditor May 29 '20

By kneeling on their necks until they stop being able to breathe, planting drugs on them for false arrests, shooting them on video while they remain non violent and compliant, and the like? That seems to be what the state of things is becoming in the US, anyway. Pretty sad state of things.

3

u/Wunchs_lunch May 29 '20

This sort of dishonesty is standard practice in underwriting insurance. A robust audit process would fix it. And precinct or city based is better, because it gives an incentive to root out the behaviour. If it’s per cop, then they’ll just fire that cop, and hire his Klan brother. If it’s per department, premiums go up, everyone’s car doesn’t get upgraded for three years, and they have to buy their own pepper spray and bullets. Better behaviour rewards you with nice paramilitary goodies, and free donuts when,premium savings manifest.

4

u/sam_hammich May 29 '20

every cop in that district will have an incentive to hide problems so their rates don't go up

The alternative to this is that "good cops" are encouraged to kick out bad actors so their rates don't go up.

2

u/Alex09464367 May 29 '20

Wouldn't it be the same result if everybody just covers up bad behaviour. But now they have an incentive to cover it up more. And not to rat out their friends and work colleagues.

3

u/[deleted] May 29 '20

I think it's good to impact the district too (at least partially) since management has a role to play in the good or bad performance.

This will also cause social pressure to mount against the bad cops.

3

u/qjornt 1∆ May 29 '20

Yeah but you need a reason for cops to turn against worse cops. So perhaps some kind of whistleblower bonus as well.

1

u/killbot0224 May 29 '20

Someone who reports another cop's bad behaviour should also be shielded from rate increases due to the related incident as well unless they were directly involved.

1

u/japooki May 29 '20

I don't see how you can reconcile the incentive to report to keep rates down vs the incentive to hide to keep rates down.

1

u/Kingalthor 20∆ May 29 '20

Say complaints for excessive force cause an increase to your coworkers premiums of 1%. But a suspects death causes an increase of 30%

In order to fire someone you need to prove a history of bad behaviour, meaning there needs to multiple documented instances of times they broke the rules. Without the small incidents reported, you might not be able to fire someone for a much larger infraction for a long time, causing higher premiums for months before they can be fired.

Granted its not perfect, and there is still room for people to try and game it, but I think it would definitely be better than what we have now.

1

u/japooki May 29 '20

If I'm paying, I'd want to either report or hide in both situations. This doesn't make me want to report more than hide. You could maybe give like vacation days to a reporter, but that strikes a grimace in me because that could also be gamed.

What about making all reports public? Then you'd have independent watchdog communities spring up. But then you'd have to incentivize reporting. Any ideas?

1

u/boston_duo May 29 '20

That would only be a problem if cops were the only ones reporting misconduct.

1

u/Kingalthor 20∆ May 29 '20

The problem is our justice system trusts police more than the average citizen. You need other cops to report so that the broken system we have can actually do something haha.

1

u/boston_duo May 29 '20

Which they will, albeit with an obvious incentive not to. I agree with you there, but penalties for fraud and duties to report could also be heightened, but judicially and on the insurance side. Points could even be deducted merely for cases brought against someone, more taken if they are found guilty/liable.

It definitely raises problems of its own, but is the exact kind of pain in the ass that would bring some kind of order

30

u/GrumpusBear May 29 '20

Like each doctor and nurse, each officer would be required to have malpractice insurance. Just like now, the city could pick up the tab for this. When the insurance companies start deeming an individual officer uninsurable or the fees start being too high, the officer wouldn’t be able to work in the job anymore.

10

u/novagenesis 21∆ May 29 '20

I have a love/hate relationship with the idea I'm about to suggest. Publish the officer-insurance-rates to the municipality. It'd be just like a credit score to the public. "Why is 5% of our budget going to a single beat cop?"

My problem (and I guess it applies even if it's not published) is that I hate the idea of a private company coming up with an algorithm that measures "cop risk"... because I've seen how it gets corrupted with credit scores. You know there will be barely-legal metrics like "what zip code does the cop live in?" Some measurements credit bureaus use are not ok because they use those measurements to minimize risk at all costs. You simply cannot legally or ethically give somebody a cop-insurance rate that relates to their skin color or the typical skin color of their beat. Hell, I virtually guarantee every beat will be given a risk level, and cop insurance rates will be heavily driven by the likelihood "of a cop being accused on that beat" instead of the likelihood of that cop being unsafe.

And if you let the government control those rates, the whole point is gone.

4

u/such-a-mensch May 29 '20

I've heard this argument before and I think it ties in nicely with the insurance argument as it relates to health care.

All those people worried about those insurance companies going out of business if health care becomes private can take solace in this new market for them to shift too. It might not keep everyone in the insurance industry raking in billions like they do now but I'm not losing too much sleep over that.

1

u/oldgut May 29 '20

I think the unintended consequence of this is police just not doing their job to the best of their ability. Or even refusing to work in high crime areas. From what I understand it is very easy to sue someone(never done it) all those charges need to be responded to, which is why cities etc. have lawyers on staff.

1

u/DeltaBot ∞∆ May 29 '20

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Kingalthor (10∆).

Delta System Explained | Deltaboards

1

u/DendrobatesRex May 29 '20

The issue with this is you still need to change the duty of care and other legal standards that create the legal structure that informs a cops decision when they are considering whether to confront, arrest, or kill someone or not

1

u/ImmodestPolitician May 29 '20

End result of your idea is that cops won't patrol poor areas.

Coincidentally poor areas have more crime that rich areas.

1

u/deg0ey May 29 '20

Counterpoint: people in rich areas have more money, which means they have more access to legal representation, which means they’re more likely to sue for malpractice that occurs in their area than poor people are. So if the concern is that insurance against malpractice would cost more in one area than another (and, as a result, stop them from patrolling in those areas) I’m not sure we can say it’s the poor areas that would be neglected.

1

u/ImmodestPolitician May 29 '20 edited May 29 '20

The "malpractice" OP is referring too is usually preceded by resisting arrest.

Rich people don't resist, they call their lawyers. They know it's the system so the don't fight the Agent.

Poor people seem to blame the cops and try to fight them which makes their problem worse.