- cross-posted to:
- politicalmemes@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- politicalmemes@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
Pilot is pretty safe job
Feel like there is a translation issue somewhere.
This maps out to top dangerous jobs IF you change Pilot to Driver - Anyone who drives all day for a living - Delivery Driver, etcetera
Don’t work in the aviation industry, I take it?
Can you give me statistics of pilot deaths/serious injuries during job?
I don’t think anyone thinks Police Officer is the most dangerous job, even cops.
I have an uncle that was a police officer. When he got out of doing highway patrol, he was relieved, because that was the most dangerous job for police. I pictured high speed chases, drivers pulling weapons, catching wanted criminals… (I was approximately 10 at the time)
It turned out it’s because walking on the side of a highway is insanely dangerous, and a driver obliviously hitting you sounds and looks almost the same as a driver responsibly passing by.
His state rolled out flashing lights that were better at grabbing attention, and that cut the total deaths for all police by something like 10%.
If pizza delivery people were allowed to be armed and trained to fight, there’d be a lot less pizza delivery driver injuries/fatalities.
In the USA the most dangerous job, is agricultural jobs. The fact that these jobs are largely done by immigrants, minorities, and the severely poor and exploited reads its exclusion as a little problematic.
Also, sex workers are workers, and I’m sure that occupation is also very dangerous, but because it is prohibited by law, I don’t think good stats exist, though IMO worth mentioning
Great comment. Thank you for sharing this informed, informative point of view.
The more I learn about Marxism, the more I’m impressed with its depth.
Thanks!
If sex workers are workers, then so are gang members.
Lemme guess, they are the same because they both break the law™
Bingo. You get a cookie.
Politicians frequently break laws. Do they count as gang members aswell?
Count as criminals i’d say. Funnily enough. Did you know that one of the most dangerous jobs in the US is being the president? There is a way above the average rate of simply being murdered on the job. Fitting for the subject.
There is a particular class characteristic to it, Marx calls it “lumpen proletariat” which is a term he abandons by the time he wrote Capital vol 1, but which forms part of his really important social analysis in The 18th Brumaire of Louis Napoleon.
The objective in doing a class analysis is not to sort people into categories in order to deal with them abstractly (this is capitalist politics), but to try and understand actual conditions in order to change them. Sex workers and gang members reproduce the same fundamental relations we see under capitalism. There is an exploiting minority and an exploited majority functioning within these occupations. I’ve met some self-identified gang-members, and admittedly their consciousness seems much closer to that of an exploiting petite-bourgeois, and this is true of many sex workers. But I’ve also met self-reported sex-workers (not professionally) at protests and pickets, particularly where feminist, body autonomy, and lgbt+ rights struggles are the organizing issue.
However, the Black Panthers, the Rainbow Coalition, the Young Lords, etc., were very successful in organizing these troubled parts of society into radical revolutionaries that were unambiguously allies of liberation struggles. The fact is, many people who end up in gangs, or as sex workers, find them selves in extremely precarious positions in which there are a limited number of opportunities available to them, in which they may make bad decisions in order to survive.
This isn’t much different than the conditions we all experience as workers, but social divisions of labor, often determined across lines of socio economic, race, gender, etc., can absolutely afford or limit the options available to people. If society afforded healthcare, mental and social healthcare, social safety nets, reduced predatory policing, affordable public housing, access to jobs, etc, to everyone; these programs objectively reduce the causes and severity of crime. That’s because it makes it so people don’t have to live in desperation and desolation. The fact is, sex work and gangs, etc., are a structural part of capitalism. Would abolishing capitalism make them disappear? Probably not at first, but I think that a mass movement or society that is built by and for the workers, against the exploitation of capital is the best chance at creating a safe and rational society.
Capitalism produces crime in order to keep people afraid of it, so that the political class can instill hatred and fear in the masses, which sow divisions among us. One of the best first steps we can take to creating a safer and more rational society is to reject the premises that capitalism uses to divide us. Yes, that may include holding some contradictory views like “sex workers are workers” but guess what, the logic of capitalism is deeply contradictory and justifies worse forms of violence on much larger scale than some gang violence. I’d love to see an end to drug cartels and the extreme violence of them, but guess what? They’re capitalists too.
Legal capitalism needs illegal capitalism in order to function
what
Walk me through this…
No kidding, I wanna see what batshit “logic” it takes to come to that conclusion
Are you hiring gang members for blow jobs?
Yes definitely equivalent, good call
Dunno about that, you’re the ones equating loggers and fishermen to sex workers. 🫣
They all have to work to survive. What would you say is the difference exactly?
Sidebar, averages sometimes aren’t the best way to tell the story. Like crab fishing in the Caribbean? Not so dangerous. Crab fishing in Alaska? More dangerous. Cop in a small town that hasn’t had a murder in over 50 years? Not so dangerous. Cop in an area with heavy gang activity and drug sales? More dangerous.
No it’s not, on avg the thing that kills most cops is getting run over on the highway. A cop that lives in gangland is still more likely to die by car accident.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/police-officer-deaths-trend-research-1.6834737
Yeah but this graph is for Canada eh. Gunshot deaths er on the rise over here
https://nleomf.org/2023-law-enforcement-fatalities-report-reveals-law-enforcement-deaths-dropped/
Why is it dangerous to be a pilot?
Major airline pilot is quite safe. There have been like a single digit number of fatal accidents among American major airlines in the 21st century not counting 9/11? That CRJ-700 that collided with a military helicopter in Washington is like, the only accident involving that type.
I used to be a flight instructor. On a fundamental level, what that job is is climbing into the passenger seat of an airplane while someone who is not qualified to fly the plane climbs into the pilot’s seat and does as much of the flying as possible.
Airline operations are pretty safe during enroute flying; they’re at high altitude miles above terrain on IFR flight plans participating in air traffic control to assist in separation from other aircraft. It gets dangerous when you’re near the ground and especially near airports because there’s more things to crash into. The vast majority of general aviation flight instruction takes place within 5,000 feet of the ground. There was a large TV mast within sight of the airport I taught at with two surface-to-air kills.
Operating near airports is particularly dangerous. The pilot’s workload increases dramatically; enroute you might actually get bored, during departure or approach your workload is very high. Couple that with the increased concentration of other air traffic, low altitude of flight and the fact you’re going to touch the ground, on purpose…is there a wonder a lot of accidents take place on or near airports? That recent mid-air collision I mentioned? Happened within a mile or two of the runway. A major airline pilot might land 4 times a day? Maybe as few as one for trans-continental or trans-oceanic pilots. Hell, there are some crews that take off, fly for a few hours, then go to bed as another crew takes over to land the plane. Regional jet pilots might land a plane 8 or 10 times in a day on more, shorter trips. My record is 86. I did 7 hours of instruction one day when all of my students just happened to be practicing landings so I did an entire work day in the pattern logging between 11 and 13 landings each. At an uncontrolled airfield, in VFR flight, self-announcing and coordinating with other aircraft in the pattern or arriving on IFR approaches.
Add to that airframes and power plants designed in the 50’s, manufactured in the 70’s and still in use today, significantly less oversight of aircraft operators, maintenance personnel and air crews compared to the airlines, and I think you’re starting to see my point.
Most pilots aren’t widebody Boeing or Airbus pilots.
high chance of crashes due to miscommunicaiton, or mental breakdown?
Hang on to this take to make policing a bit less dangerous
Departments could have their officers start wearing less tactical uniforms, maybe blue shirt and pants. Maybe they could have the officers then walk around towns, visit local stores, go to town hall meetings to get to know the neighborhood. Maybe be seen doing some volunteering and helping the community out. You know have the officers be an upstanding citizen of the community that helps out. A person that the community trusts. They could also MAYBE just MAYYBEE be trained to de-escalate situations with negotiation tactics?
I know it’s a crazy idea, it’s never happened in the past. Remember we have always lived in an over militarized police state that shoots first and never asks questions.
Departments could have their officers start wearing less tactical uniforms, maybe blue shirt and pants. Maybe they could have the officers then walk around towns, visit local stores, go to town hall meetings to get to know the neighborhood.
Already the case for most PDs, and has been for decades.
Maybe be seen doing some volunteering and helping the community out.
Less common but still done; it’s usually labeled “performative” or “copaganda.”
They could also MAYBE just MAYYBEE be trained to de-escalate situations with negotiation tactics?
Already the case for virtually all agencies, and has been for decades.
I know it’s a crazy idea, it’s never happened in the past.
It’s not a crazy idea, it’s just that you don’t pay much attention to what’s going on so you don’t realize it’s already done; your priority seems to be circle-jerking.
I know it’s a crazy idea, it’s never happened in the past. Remember we have always lived in an over militarized police state that shoots first and never asks questions.
Obvious sarcasm is obvious (though apparently not to you)
Whooshed a bit there, eh?
They’re saying policing should go back to what it was a few decades ago before the extreme militarization of police that’s happened in the last few years.
The city I work in has a population of less than 4,000 and we border a major metro area. There’s no reason for us to have 25 police officers, all of which are outfitted with assault weapons and riot gear. We shouldn’t even have a SWAT team. If we ever need one we can call for help from the city next door.
They want enough cruisers that they have a backup for every single vehicle, and are now asking for an MRAP. And police get whatever they want while we have to fight for a goddamned printer.
Whooshed a bit there, eh?
No.
They’re saying policing should go back to what it was a few decades ago before the extreme militarization of police that’s happened in the last few years.
That’s a slightly different sentiment. They proposed several individual things that should be changed without realizing they’re already that way.
The city I work in has a population of less than 4,000 and we border a major metro area. There’s no reason for us to have 25 police officers
That’s a ratio of 1:160, roughly on-par with Spain:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_number_of_police_officers
all of which are outfitted with assault weapons and riot gear.
I doubt that.
We shouldn’t even have a SWAT team. If we ever need one we can call for help from the city next door.
How does moving your militarization from City to County make things less militarized?
They want enough cruisers that they have a backup for every single vehicle, and are now asking for an MRAP. And police get whatever they want while we have to fight for a goddamned printer.
That’s pretty silly - you should be petitioning your city government about that. Barely relates to militarization, though.
I work in the same building with them. Every officer takes an AR and body armor to the squad car when heading out to man their speed trap and bring it back at the end of the shift to store in their air-conditioned locker (not just the locker room - the actual interior of each locker itself has its own thermostat and air supply).
All that being said, there is a need for specialized units. But the big change the US has seen over the past 25 years or so has been giving SWAT-style weaponry and resources to everyone. The traffic cops pullings people over for speeding in a school zone don’t all need riot gear and an AR in the trunk. Detectives performing investigations don’t need access to tear gas and flashbangs. But for major cities with thousands of occifers, having a few dozen specialists makes sense.
Small towns used to just call the state or nearby major city for assistance if they needed heavier equipment or tactical units. Now they all have the heavy equipment, and when they have it they’ll find an excuse to use it.
A nearby town had a mental health crisis recently with a kid threatening to kill himself. The police had just gotten a new-to-them MRAP, and instead of talking to the kid or just using the key the parents had given them, they drove a tank through the front of the house, deployed flashbangs, and tackled the kid.
So the kid now has more mental health issues AND the family lost their house.
Every officer takes an AR
Ah you think rifles are assault rifles. That explains a lot.
I work in the same building with them. Every officer takes an AR and body armor to the squad car when heading out to man their speed trap and bring it back at the end of the shift to store in their air-conditioned locker (not just the locker room - the actual interior of each locker itself has its own thermostat and air supply).
Sounds like 90% of your complaints have nothing to do with militarization, however valid they are.
All that being said, there is a need for specialized units. But the big change the US has seen over the past 25 years or so has been giving SWAT-style weaponry and resources to everyone. The traffic cops pullings people over for speeding in a school zone don’t all need riot gear and an AR in the trunk.
Even citing your own unverifiable anecdote you failed to explain how your traffic cops have riot gear, so I don’t know why you’re re-asserting it as fact.
Detectives performing investigations don’t need access to tear gas and flashbangs. But for major cities with thousands of occifers, having a few dozen specialists makes sense.
I’m sure they figure they want to be self-reliant and not have to depend on another agency. Is your county agency objectively the same quality or better? If so, as long as the plurality of voting residents of your city don’t mind the much higher response times in emergencies, your point here makes sense. Otherwise, it does not.
Small towns used to just call the state or nearby major city for assistance if they needed heavier equipment or tactical units. Now they all have the heavy equipment
Again, mostly because American voters have insisted the equipment and training is distributed down the pyramid in the wake of things like Columbine. There’s pros and cons, as described above.
The police had just gotten a new-to-them MRAP, and instead of talking to the kid or just using the key the parents had given them, they drove a tank through the front of the house
Are you conflating MRAPs with tanks?
I understand this and the Rifle vs. Assault Rifle issue can seem pedantic, but if you actually want to address concerns in an objective, solutions-focused manner, you should want to be accurate.
Obviously if you’re just venting it doesn’t matter, but I like to solve problems rather than (listen to a) vent about them, so you can just save yourself the effort.
I know what an assault rifle is. I used to work in the firearm industry and own over 50 personal guns. The police have select-fire rifles built on the Armalite platform. They’re assault rifles. The guns used by our department don’t have an M designation because they’re not US military spec or military issue. It’s like the difference between an M9 and a 92FS.
They have riot shields, tear gas, etc in the cruisers. They carry the heavy body armor and the weapons back and forth because they are sized/kitted out to the officer’s size and preferences and they share cruisers between shifts.
I know what an assault rifle is. I used to work in the firearm industry and own over 50 personal guns. The police have select-fire rifles built on the Armalite platform. They’re assault rifles. The guns used by our department don’t have an M designation because they’re not US military spec or military issue. It’s like the difference between an M9 and a 92FS.
I sincerely doubt 25/25 of the LEOs at your city’s PD have select-fire rifles, or even 10/10 of the patrol cars or whatever it works out to be with the following:
They have riot shields, tear gas, etc in the cruisers. They carry the heavy body armor and the weapons back and forth because they are sized/kitted out to the officer’s size and preferences and they share cruisers between shifts.
Are you asserting they’re donning these at every call? Otherwise what difference does it make if they have them available in seconds versus 20-minute drive to get the gear and a 20-minute drive back to the scene of a riot? Gas expenditure going towards oil barons or giving nasty people 40 minutes to do their thing before the cops get there rather than 1?
And a major reason why stormtrooping is dangerous is because they constantly kill themselves (and much more other people ofc) by driving like murderous shitbags. Fuck cops. Fuck cars.
I wish it stated what was considered a ‘job related illness’, because that could mean everything from ‘complications related to injuries received on the clock’ to ‘diabetes from too many donuts’.
My money is on “refused to wear a mask during a pandemic “
I’d agree, but they did have a separate row for COVID, and the job-related doesn’t stay higher post 2020
6 other jobs is my favorite
too bad they tend to support people like LEOs.
Not relevant but I assume these are, like, bush pilots, not “flight attendants please prepare the cabin for arrival” pilots.
Nirses
I think there should be an updated version with more up-to-date “ranking” but also gender inclusive language. I am quite sure there arent only garbage men and while I dont really care about gender equality in jobs like fishing, there arent only men there.
Edit: Well, how do they always say? Be the change you wish to see in the world
Yes we need LogFighter, FishFighetr, GravityFighter, Crimefighter, Firefighter, MunchiesFighter(?)
Nice to see an updated meme :) Fisher sounds weird, even though fishing is a thing. Maybe English needs a new word for the animal.
Oh yeah, I kinda assumed that this word exists but after checking it actually doesnt. Should have sticked with “fishing worker”
Fishers, garbadgers, we can shorthand them all while we’re at it
🦡
I like the meme where they’re all like firefighters so :
Logfighters
Fishfighters
Planefighters
Rooffighters (not to be confused with Roo Fighters, also a dangerous job)
Garbagefighters
Steelfighters
Truckfighters
Six Fighter melée!
We need to bring back -wranglers
Logwranglers
Fishwranglers
Planewranglers
Roofwranglers
Garbagewranglers
Steelwranglers
Truckwranglers
Truckfighters is a band
Thanks!
Being in a band also strikes me as a more dangerous job than being a cop. Mick Jagger notwithstillstanding
Garbadgers is making me laugh unreasonably.
You misspelled garbageers.
thats like what people in the 60’s thought we were going to have, garbage people with jetpacks and such
Different professions have different attitudes towards gendered nouns. Like actor is a gender neutral term.
But you see their jon is soooo dangerous they need to be allowed to pull a gun on anyone and everyone.
Teachers
Well yeah, if you do what regular people assume you do, you’ll get murdered by cops to protect their own asses.
