Police - Serve and Protect

[seanD]

There are more than a few bad cops you are correct. There are a few in most areas, but counting the whole country those few do add up. That is a pure technicality however. Clearly the media attention is almost exclusively focused on the more "newsworthy" stuff. Human interest is examined only when there is nothing "better" to cover. I do believe that good cops far outnumber bad cops.

Or maybe there's another way to look at it (though I still don't necessarily rule out the problem of good cops looking the other way when it comes to their corrupt fellow officers). It isn't that a lot of individual cops are bad, it's that police themselves are good because they're loyally following a bad system. It goes back to the issue of the militarization of police. They're not just being given hardware that military troops would have in a place like falluja, where there is no consitution and everyone is a potential enemy, but they're actually being trained to deal with citizens as though military troops were dealing with enemy insurgents. This would explain the videos I see where cops shoot unarmed homeless people in the back, or throw wheelchair bound people on the ground and stomp their heads, or when I see big bad male cops pepper spray a bunch of unarmed peaceful female protesters, or when I saw a whole unit of officers use rubber bullets and batons on peaceful protesters and even the press (no I'm not talking about Furguson, but what happened in LA years ago). If this is the way to look at it, then it becomes more than just a racial issue or an issue of a few bad cops here and there. The problem isn't the cop but the protocol which is making things worse because it's turning society aganst this agressive behavior, which then becomes a vicious loop.

[Cow Poke]

Or maybe there's another way to look at it (though I still don't necessarily rule out the problem of good cops looking the other way when it comes to their corrupt fellow officers). It isn't that a lot of individual cops are bad, it's that police themselves are good because they're loyally following a bad system. It goes back to the issue of the militarization of police. They're not just being given hardware that military troops would have in a place like falluja, where there is no consitution and everyone is a potential enemy, but they're actually being trained to deal with citizens as though military troops were dealing with enemy insurgents. This would explain the videos I see where cops shoot unarmed homeless people in the back, or throw wheelchair bound people on the ground and stomp their heads, or when I see big bad male cops pepper spray a bunch of unarmed peaceful female protesters, or when I saw a whole unit of officers use rubber bullets and batons on peaceful protesters and even the press (no I'm not talking about Furguson, but what happened in LA years ago). If this is the way to look at it, then it becomes more than just a racial issue or an issue of a few bad cops here and there. The problem isn't the cop but the protocol which is making things worse because it's turning society aganst this agressive behavior, which then becomes a vicious loop.

Wow, the exaggeration meter was doing 3600 rpm!

[seanD]

Wow, the exaggeration meter was doing 3600 rpm!

Which part?

[Cow Poke]

Which part?

The part after "or maybe".

[Jedidiah]

Or maybe there's another way to look at it (though I still don't necessarily rule out the problem of good cops looking the other way when it comes to their corrupt fellow officers). It isn't that a lot of individual cops are bad, it's that police themselves are good because they're loyally following a bad system. It goes back to the issue of the militarization of police. They're not just being given hardware that military troops would have in a place like falluja, where there is no consitution and everyone is a potential enemy, but they're actually being trained to deal with citizens as though military troops were dealing with enemy insurgents. This would explain the videos I see where cops shoot unarmed homeless people in the back, or throw wheelchair bound people on the ground and stomp their heads, or when I see big bad male cops pepper spray a bunch of unarmed peaceful female protesters, or when I saw a whole unit of officers use rubber bullets and batons on peaceful protesters and even the press (no I'm not talking about Furguson, but what happened in LA years ago). If this is the way to look at it, then it becomes more than just a racial issue or an issue of a few bad cops here and there. The problem isn't the cop but the protocol which is making things worse because it's turning society aganst this agressive behavior, which then becomes a vicious loop.

I need that negative amen button again. You need an english teacher.

[myth]

I want to say I appreciate the posts here. It's discouraging to see so many people form such negative opinions in every day life, but the rare 'thank you' helps balance the constant negativity.

I'd like to comment about the militarization of police issue, but right now I don't trust myself to keep it polite (and I don't want to derail the thread). Perhaps tomorrow.

[Cow Poke]

It goes back to the issue of the militarization of police.

Everything seems to go back to that lately.

They're not just being given hardware that military troops would have in a place like falluja,

In the first place, departments that HAVE tactical equipment do not make it available to all officers in their command. There is usually a dynamic entry or tactical team that is specially trained for that purpose.

Secondly, I'm guessing you've never been to Fallujah, and don't have a CLUE what weapons and equipment is available there, because it's WAY more than is available to US police departments.

where there is no consitution and everyone is a potential enemy,

That's just goofy. And our guys are fully aware that there will be a critique and after-action analysis, review boards, and even if they are cleared criminally of any alleged abuses, they can still be sued civilly. And it's "constitution", not consitution.

but they're actually being trained to deal with citizens as though military troops were dealing with enemy insurgents.

Another goofy claim. WHO, exactly, is training them to do that?

This would explain the videos I see where cops shoot unarmed homeless people in the back,

Yes, they get bonus points for that.

or throw wheelchair bound people on the ground and stomp their heads,

That happens, what... once a week? Every day?

or when I see big bad male cops pepper spray a bunch of unarmed peaceful female protesters, or when I saw a whole unit of officers use rubber bullets and batons on peaceful protesters and even the press (no I'm not talking about Furguson, but what happened in LA years ago).

And that has been roundly criticized and denounced, and is actually discussed as part of the training on what NOT to do.

If this is the way to look at it,

Which doesn't surprise me is your preference

then it becomes more than just a racial issue or an issue of a few bad cops here and there. The problem isn't the cop but the protocol which is making things worse because it's turning society aganst this agressive behavior, which then becomes a vicious loop.

The problem is people running their mouths off, not knowing what they're talking about.

(I ended that sentence with a preposition just for you, Jed!)

[Cow Poke]

I want to say I appreciate the posts here. It's discouraging to see so many people form such negative opinions in every day life, but the rare 'thank you' helps balance the constant negativity.

Amen!

I'd like to comment about the militarization of police issue, but right now I don't trust myself to keep it polite (and I don't want to derail the thread). Perhaps tomorrow.

I got your back, bro!

[Cow Poke]

I remember a story years ago about a California Highway Patrolman who just got off duty, and on the way home he bought a half gallon of ice cream and some other groceries. When he got back in the car, dispatch called and notified him that his relief had called in sick, and asked if he could work another 4 hours. He cheerfully agreed to work an additional 4 hours, but what to do with the ice cream?

He pulled onto the highway, and watched for somebody "driving nicely", and turned on the overheads, and pulled the car over. As he approached the driver, he asked, "do you happen to be on your way home?" The driver answered in the affirmative, and the officer said, "Good, wait just a minute, I'll be right back".

He came back to the driver with the half gallon of ice cream and said, "enjoy this - it's a reward for good driving".

[Cow Poke]

Why did God make Firefighters?



So Cops could have heroes, too!

[seanD]

I need that negative amen button again. You need an english teacher.

Uh, okay. Since you had no response to the actual points of the post and instead shifted the focus on my grammar, I guess I'll have to ask. Other than my mispelling of constitution (I was typing fast and I don't have a spell checker on the comp I'm using) and probable mispelling of Furguson (like who cares how it's spelled), what was wrong with my "english."

[Epoetker]

I'm going with Stephen Carter's view on this: the danger (and responsibility) is not primarily in the police, but the law:

On the opening day of law school, I always counsel my first-year students never to support a law they are not willing to kill to enforce. Usually they greet this advice with something between skepticism and puzzlement, until I remind them that the police go armed to enforce the will of the state, and if you resist, they might kill you.

I wish this caution were only theoretical. It isn’t. Whatever your view on the refusal of a New York City grand jury to indict the police officer whose chokehold apparently led to the death of Eric Garner, it’s useful to remember the crime that Garner is alleged to have committed: He was selling individual cigarettes, or loosies, in violation of New York law....

Part of the problem, Husak suggests, is the growing tendency of legislatures -- including Congress -- to toss in a criminal sanction at the end of countless bills on countless subjects. It’s as though making an offense criminal shows how much we care about it.

Well, maybe so. But making an offense criminal also means that the police will go armed to enforce it. Overcriminalization matters, Husak says, because the costs of facing criminal sanction are so high and because the criminal law can no longer sort out the law-abiding from the non-law-abiding. True enough. But it also matters because -- as the Garner case reminds us -- the police might kill you.

I don’t mean this as a criticism of cops, whose job after all is to carry out the legislative will. The criticism is of a political system that takes such bizarre delight in creating new crimes for the cops to enforce. It’s unlikely that the New York legislature, in creating the crime of selling untaxed cigarettes, imagined that anyone would die for violating it. But a wise legislator would give the matter some thought before creating a crime. Officials who fail to take into account the obvious fact that the laws they’re so eager to pass will be enforced at the point of a gun cannot fairly be described as public servants.

Nor can the people who call for the laws to be enforced at the point of a gun but shrink in horror when the violence happens be fairly described as 'good citizens.' Nice to see what I do seem to recall saying previously a few dozen times being said in Bloomberg, though I'll credit some of my old Manosphere influences for their habit of asking those explicit questions in a simple format, like Who Will Swing the Blade?

[seer]

In today's world that may be true. For most of the history of the US it was the Judeo/Christian morality that was the main protection. As that has faded police protection has, in my opinion, become more important.

A priest friend of mine has a saying - the less police you have in the home (fathers) the more police you will need in the streets.

[Sparko]

Or maybe there's another way to look at it (though I still don't necessarily rule out the problem of good cops looking the other way when it comes to their corrupt fellow officers). It isn't that a lot of individual cops are bad, it's that police themselves are good because they're loyally following a bad system. It goes back to the issue of the militarization of police. They're not just being given hardware that military troops would have in a place like falluja, where there is no consitution and everyone is a potential enemy, but they're actually being trained to deal with citizens as though military troops were dealing with enemy insurgents. This would explain the videos I see where cops shoot unarmed homeless people in the back, or throw wheelchair bound people on the ground and stomp their heads, or when I see big bad male cops pepper spray a bunch of unarmed peaceful female protesters, or when I saw a whole unit of officers use rubber bullets and batons on peaceful protesters and even the press (no I'm not talking about Furguson, but what happened in LA years ago). If this is the way to look at it, then it becomes more than just a racial issue or an issue of a few bad cops here and there. The problem isn't the cop but the protocol which is making things worse because it's turning society aganst this agressive behavior, which then becomes a vicious loop.

It is obvious that you have no actual experience with the police. Just what you see on the news and youtube.

Going by your same standards I would never fly in an airplane because all I ever see are reports about hijackings and planes crashing.

Also when I said there were a "few" bad cops, I was speaking relative to the good cops. And by "bad" I don't just mean corrupt. There are also incompetent cops out there too. Usually the bad cops (both types) end up losing their jobs.

I grew up with a dad in the military and my brother is a cop. I also grew up during the vietnam war. What I see is people (mostly liberals but it seems to be spreading) treating cops today the way vietnam vets were treated when during and after the war. They were over there fighting for their lives and protecting the South vientnamese who were our allies, and all you saw on the news was reports of incidents where soldiers did something terrible. The news and the hippies made it sound like all soldiers were criminals who just wanted to kill innocent villagers, when that wasn't what happened at all. The innocent villagers were vietcong who were bent on attacking our troops and hiding among women and children. My dad even told me of how they trained children to wear bombs and walk into American camps, acting lost and hungry, and blow themselves up. So rather than respect our soldiers, we treated them like dirt when they came back home.

Today we are doing the same with the police. Society only looks for something bad to say about them and that is all you see most of the time, and police are treated as if they are some sort of Nazi SS troops. When in fact they are the same as you and I, and want to help their neighborhoods and keep them safe.

Think about how safe you feel right now in your own home, compared to if there were no police and criminals ran he streets.

I started this thread to thank police officers, not condemn them. You might want to rethink your participation in here.

[Sparko]

I want to say I appreciate the posts here. It's discouraging to see so many people form such negative opinions in every day life, but the rare 'thank you' helps balance the constant negativity.

I'd like to comment about the militarization of police issue, but right now I don't trust myself to keep it polite (and I don't want to derail the thread). Perhaps tomorrow.

You're welcome!

and when the criminals run around with AK47s and hand grenades, the police have to protect themselves and give an appropriate response. The so-called militarization of the police, is by and large, what they have to do to keep the peace.