[Guntalk]

Does it bother anyone else to hear law enforcement officers refer to those who are not in law enforceent as "civilians?"

To my way of thinking, they are civilians, also, unless they are in the military.

I see the distinction as which set of laws one lives under. If you are in the military, you are under military laws. If not, you are a civilian, and are under the laws the rest of use live with.

Of course, I might be bothered more by the way the term "civilian" is often used as a slight, a put-down, or even said with just a hit of a sneer.

Or, is it just me?

[MagKnightX]

While you are technically correct, you have to remember that (at least in my and people I know's experience), many LEOs seem to believe that not only are they above the law, they are above us filthy pariahs.

[Mark Tyson]

It doesnt bother me - cops have to distinguish between LEO's and non-LEO's in their conversations.

[TechBrute]

It's just part of the mentality that things like speed limits and other laws don't apply to them. As far as I'm concerned, it's just a career choice. You want to put your life on the line for an ungrateful public for sub-par wages, feel free. I will applaud you. However, I don't think that being a LEO makes you any sort of super-citizen that is above ANY of our laws. All you've got is city-sponsored training and a shiny little thing that you pin to your shirt.

<disclaimer> This certainly doesn't imply that LEOs are anything other than upstanding citizens. If you are a LEO and are offended by it, I suggest you ask yourself why. Do you FEEL that you should have a different set of laws?

I'm wearing my asbestos-lined undies, so flame away...

[TechBrute]

It doesnt bother me - cops have to distinguish between LEO's and non-LEO's in their conversations. Is "officers" and "citizens" not good enough?

[Jack19]

It's not just you...and I'm an ex-police officer; I left policing before the term "Law Enforcement Officer" was popular.

The militarization of US police is a concern to a lot of people; although, personally, I think it has to do more with money, and where money comes from, than an inherent attitude change of the VAST majority of offcers themselves.

What concerns me more is the military showing up at civilian policing events.

[kbr80]

Any LEO is just a civilian that wears a badge to work. No better, no worse than the rest of us.

[TechBrute]

What concerns me more is the military showing up at civilian policing events. No kidding.:what:

[BluesBear]

I am a former LEO who is now a Civilian. I am not offended by being called that.

You have Military, LEO & Civilians. ALL of us are bound by the same laws. Murder is murder, no matter if you are Military, LEO or Civie. Theft is still theft. Rape is still rape.

What IS different between the 3 is the RULES are different.

LEO have a different set of Obligations. In most areas an on duty LEO (and in many, off duty as well) are obligated to stop at a traffic accident unless they are resounding to a closer and more important matter. A cililian is not required to stop, (the only requirement is to slow down and stare :neener: ) neither are military personel.

LEO are obligated to chase after and capture the bank robber. The rest of us aren't.

LEO aren't obligated to keep us safe while standiing at the ATM, that's our individual civilian responsibility.

The Military has the responsibility to protect our country. It's the civilian responsibility to protect his/her self & family.

Most LEO can drive big gas guzzling cars with pretty coloured lights and sirens. Most Civilians can't.

A civilian can put a Support Your Local Police or an I'm The NRA bumper sticker on his car but an LEO can't put a Support Concealed Carry or I'm The NRA bumber sticker on his cruiser.

Soldiers can carry a selective fire M-16 on deployment. But are severely limited in their ability to carry anything else.
As a Civilian I can choose to carry any handgun I can afford any day of the week.

As a Civilian I can choose any type of ammunition I feel is appropriate.
Military and LEO must use what they're told is OK.
( :evil: MP5 full of Gold Dots? :evil: )


The LAWS are the same for all of us. But the Rules Of Conduct aren't.

So I don't mind the different terms. I was once proud to be an American Law Enforcement Officer.

Now I am just as proud to be an American Civilian.

[wingnutx]

Realistically they have to use some sort of term to refer to non-cops, and 'civilians' makes as much sense as anything. I hear 'citizens' used as well, which isn't really any less accurate.

Of course cops are technically both citizens and civilians. I just don't think it's a big deal.

[TechBrute]

I don't think that LEO is a bad term, after all, it's just a term that covers police, marshalls, sheriffs, highway patrol, etc.

[sm]

Nope.
For the most part in the context I hear is to distinguish those with training,responsibilties and such. Civilian, LEO, just clarifies .
Kinda like distinguishing any Professional, Dr. Nurse...from patients. Able to speak the language, decipher codes, meds...from non ( or those not in that profession. [ Though I don't like the new pc term "clients" for patients].

Now I don't want to be called "subject", by anyone, Gov't, LEO, Military, or in the Medical sense.

Subject is the term I really don't want to hear...sometimes the context of "citizen" from some politicians and gummit folks...sure could have sworn it had a "subject" connotation.

IMO

[Ala Dan]

Another former LEO, turned civilian. Actually, I'm enjoying
the civilian way of life; cuz I was leaning towards thoughts
of the world being filled with nothing but scum-bag's!

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

[Steve in PA]

This topic has been beat to death.

Your not a LEO and are offended by the word "civilian"......oh well.

Want to refer to a LEO as a civilian.......fine.

LEO refers to you as a civilian........yeah, so

Demand that LEOs must state that they are civilians........don't hold your breath

I honestly don't see the problem. As prior military, current LEO and future "civilian".........who cares. When I'm no longer a LEO......then I'm a civilian.

I don't have to answer to anyone.....I don't wear a uniform or have a rank structure.........the only orders I have to follow are my own. A LEO stops my and refers to me as a civilian.......wonderful.

The problem is people can't see that there is a difference between being a LEO and a civilian. I'll give you two examples. The last two weekends I've been at my sons football games.......both weekends I've had to break up fights.......knock down drag out fights between fight #1 (girls) and fight #2 (boys).

The stands were packed and the upper walkway was packed. I turned my head and in both instances fists and what not were flying. All the parents just sat there......but I had to run up and break them apart before someone did serious damage to the other person.

Yeah, I could have sat there and said I'm off-duty.....and its not my town...but I could not do that. I felt it was my obligation, my duty......to act and I did. Military has sworn an oath.....LEOs have sworn an oath. Have you? No. Military has rules, regulations and guidlines that one must follow. Ditto for the LEO. Other than the laws of USA.....are civilians held to any higher standards? No.

If for some reason someone got seriously hurt....and someone pointed out that I was a LEO and didn't do anything (a couple of the parents know I'm a LEO for another town)......guess what??? I'm going to be asked alot of questions. One of the parents said to my wife, "won't he get in trouble?" And my wife politely told her "he's a LEO 24/7........being a LEO is not a 9-5 job like some people think it is."

The "civilian" parents could just sit there and do nothing and not have to answer for anything.

So for all those that can't see that there is a difference between LEOs and everyone else.......get over it.

Nothing I said will change anyones opinion........I really could care less. More than likely it will start a flame war

[BenW]

Military has sworn an oath.....LEOs have sworn an oath. Have you? No.
Yes. Federal civil servants all take the same oath of office to defend the Constitution that uniformed military personnel do, but we are bound by civil laws, not the USUCMJ, hence we are civilians.

[semf]

I honestly don't see the problem. As prior military, current LEO and future "civilian".........who cares. When I'm no longer a LEO......then I'm a civilian.
I couldn't agree more. For one thing it's a word and words will never harm you. I work for a pest control company, we work long hours when(very rarely) we see each other out of uniform we refer to our attire as civilian clothes and we certainly aren't implying that while in our bug duds that we are any different form the other citizens.
People get too hung up on words. If it is not said with malice or contempt (which I believe was Guntalk's main complaint) let it go.

[JohnBT]

"To my way of thinking, they are civilians, also, unless they are in the military."

Yup. Subject to miltary law vs subject to civil law. That's what my daddy taught me and he's been both.

It does bother me when folks are inaccurate, or just lazy, about facts.

Of course, I've been accused of being picky about other things, too.

John

[JDSlack]

Gee whiz, gosh..did some looking in the dictionary, and...

CIVILIAN -n. person not in the armed services or police force. -adj. of or for civilians.

But what is really interesting is...

CITIZEN -n. 1 member of a State, either native or naturalized. 2 inhabitant of a city. 3 US civilian.

I must assume by that that LEOs are not citizens! Damn, I was a cop for 31 years and never knew I wasn't a citizen. Glad I are one now, so I can worry about important stuff.

[BenW]

Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary, Deluxe Edition (1983):

Civilian (n):
1) One who is skilled in civil or Roman law.
2) Any person not in the military or naval service.

Civilian (a):
Relating to or characteristic of civilians; nonmilitary.

For every definition, there is an equal and opposite re-definition. :p

[444]

I have never understood the big deal about this. I have used, and hear the term civilian used as a firefighter. I suppose if I thought about it, I would be refering to someone who is not wearing a uniform. Or maybe someone without a "duty to act". For example, you might respond to a fire and the next door neighbor is attempting to fight the fire with a garden hose. You might be telling the story and say that you pulled up and a civilian was fighting the fire. You might be on some kind of call where safety is a concern and say; keep all civilians out of the area, meaning anyone without a good reason to be there or someone whose job requires them to be exposed to the danger present. You might be on a call and see someone standing there and ask who it is; the reply might be, it is a civilian obviously meaning that the person isn't one of the people involved in the call.
We run calls on a daily basis with police officers from a variety of departments and agencies, and we sometimes run calls with active duty military personel. We sometimes run calls where off duty firefighters, LEOs, or military personel are present. We run calls where people respond from an agency in plain clothes. I simply use the term to describe someone on a scene that isn't a member of those groups.
I never considered it to be a term that was derogatory. I never considered it to be a term used to describe someone that doesn't share some special status.

[355sigfan]

It only seems to upset those that hate cops and want to find anything at all to be offended by. Its just a terminology. No big deal.
Pat

[cordex]

A lot of people refer to a magazine as a clip. Doesn't make it accurate.

Seems that most of it is probably just a simple way of making a distinction between Us and Them. That could be harmless, or that could be downright evil. Depends on the officer and context, I'd say. If an officer wants to make a distinction for clarity, I'd not be offended. There are times, though, that I think it is said in order to give an impression of multiple levels of citizenship. Maybe not so often, though.

Then there are the cops who just wish they were military, or haven't left the military behind. These aren't the kind of police I like to deal with.
A civilian can put a Support Your Local Police or an I'm The NRA bumper sticker on his car but an LEO can't put a Support Concealed Carry or I'm The NRA bumber sticker on his cruiser.
Ooops! I'd better talk to the officers at the Indy 1500 next time and tell 'em they aren't allowed to do that.
The LAWS are the same for all of us.
What about laws with specific exemptions for police? Yeah, they are following the same laws, but the laws say different things for different people.
So for all those that can't see that there is a difference between LEOs and everyone else.......get over it.
I see that there is a difference.
But the attitude of some LEOs is wrong, I think.
Seems that some forget their job is to protect and serve so-called "civilians", not just each other. Thankfully, most are not like this. That our society is still functioning is proof of this.
It only seems to upset those that hate cops and want to find anything at all to be offended by.
Baloney. Downright inaccurate. Deceitful, even.
It can put me on edge, and I do not "hate cops".
But is easier to dismiss if you can paint with that broad brush, yes?

[355sigfan]

Baloney. Downright inaccurate. Deceitful, even.
It can put me on edge, and I do not "hate cops".
But is easier to dismiss if you can paint with that broad brush, yes?
END

Based on your reaction I think I hit the nail on the head. Most of the people I have come across on these boards who bring up this subject are the ones constantly flaming leo's and have an ax to grind. Its a simple but truthfull observation. Nothing deceitful about it. Yes their are some bad cops who think non leo's are somehow lower than themselves. But for everyone of those cops I can find a anti govt wako that hates cops and any sign of authority and makes a living out of trolling and flame baiting leo's on boards like this.
Pat

[Orthonym]

Sir:

Please read some history and some law. The only difference between you and me, legally, is that you are allowed to arrest people for misdemeanors, and I'm not!

Flaming Leos? Have an axe to grind?

I plead Guilty on both counts!

The formerly free country my ancestors came from (now a POLICE state) used to be inhabited by people who said things like, "I'd rather a hundred men have their throats cut in the road before my house than suffer even one of the King's men break my door down to make sure I'm not a criminal, the way they do it in FRANCE!"


(I'm obviously paraphrasing here, but you're welcome to look up the arguments against Bobby Peel's government bullies, written at the time of his proposals).


Aarrgh! I'll continue to talk like a pirate until conditions improve!

[Tamara]

Yes their are some bad cops who think non leo's are somehow lower than themselves. But for everyone of those cops I can find a anti govt wako that hates cops

Good thing, too. I'd hate to see the day when the bad cops outnumber the anti-government whackos. ;)

(Think about it...)

[JohnBT]

I don't like the term COP either.

And what is it with this LEO stuff. It always makes me think of Leo Durocher. All these police officers can't want to be like Leo can they?

www.cmgww.com/baseball/durocher/index.htm

JohnBT...the T must stand for throwback

[toro]

That's funny my dictionary says something different.

Civilian -- A person NOT on active duty in a military, POLICE, or fire-fighting force. Mmmmmmmmmm it does say police. However I thought police were civilians.

Citizen -- An inhabitant of a city or town. A person who owns allegiance to a government and is intitled to protection from it.

I guess it is what dictionary you are reading?

Mrs. Toro


__________________________________________
1 Chronicles 28:20
And David said to Solomon his son, Be strong and of good courage, and do it: fear not, nor be dismayed: for the Lord God, even my God, will be with thee; he will not fail thee, nor forsake thee, until thou has finished all the work for the service of the house of the Lord.

[Holly76201]

I think SOME LEOs {the abbreviation always make me think of the astrological sign Leo} use the term "Civilian" in conversation with other LEOs as shorthand for "not one of 'us' ".
And why do they say "not one of 'us' "? Because these days so many GOOD LEOs are accussed of being JBTs just because they wear a uniform, badge and gun and put their lives on the line 24/7 to Protect and Serve.
My dearly beloved is an LEO and I get really tired of seeing all officers painted with the same brush, especially on this board!
:fire:
Flame me if you want to, but I don't see YOU {the LEO critics} out there trying to make a difference!
Holly

[TechBrute]

but I don't see YOU {the LEO critics} out there trying to make a difference! So the only way to "make a difference" is to be a LEO?

[Holly76201]

Techbrute, and any other, I'll answer you in a PM, but I won't Flame on the board.
And of course there are other ways to "Make a difference" besides being an LEO. But LEOs are charged with reducing crime and b/cof underfunded, understaffed departments everywhere they are actually more of a mop up detail or a Crime Solving Person rather than a crime prevention agent.

[sm]

Holly,
granted many of my friends whom serve and protect are retired or retiring ( that age thingy you know...me included).
In anything we have bad examples. We sure use a lot of acronyms these days. People nowadays tend to impress within an industry by speaking in code. Had a neighbor, bad bad example, drinking one night with fellow officers...two rds of a Glock .40 went through the wall...the other way thank goodness,( for me) and thank goodness that other neighbor wasn't hit.
No longer is he on the force, or most of that party crew, these were the kind that gives the dept the bad rep.

I've had it in mine. Somtimes one needs to speak with a co-worker in terms for a reason, I have no problem with that. Sometimes it distinguishes a Professional in a business from that is not. Or denotes one is trained, maybe something as simple as "can you drive a stick, or know CPR"...not what you say, but how one says it...really might be a dire need for assistance.

I spent some time in the OR. Now its one thing to say things like GSW R patella. Ok in the OR to say abraded R patella, but tell the family the gunshot wound is right kneecap...or little child just scrapped his knee...they just want to know, not really in a mood to decipher. I worked with good nurses and surgeons, but had a few trying to impress each other...or themselves. Families felt like they were being talked down to.

Acronyms and PC...not always a good thing IMO.

Can be really bad to talk down and use that "terminology". For instance you find me hurt, in pain, and semi conscious. You call for help for me not good to say I'm allergic to ASA, and I'll go into anaphalatic shock. Now what that means I'm allergic to aspirin and any form...any Non-steriodial anti inflamatory ( NSADS). I'm gonna be in trouble-quick.

[geekWithA.45]

Let's lay aside, for a moment, the issues of LEO corruption and elitism, as arguing the degree to which they exist is a distraction.

IMO, the heart of the issue is that someone who has undergone screening and training, and has been issued a badge is viewed by both society and the law as "presumed trustworthy".

That's perfectly OK.

THE PROBLEM COMES when the civilians are viewed by society and the law as "presumed NOT trustworthy".

And nothing drives the point home so deeply as any firearm, magazine or ammunition box stamped "LEO USE ONLY", and all of the laws, regulations and implications that are behind the existence of those 10 letters stamped on steel.

Hell, the NJ supreme court even went so far as to judicially invent an NJ AWB exemption for LEOs that did not in fact exist in the text of the law.

It creates two broad classes of citizen, those presumed worthy of trust, and those who are presumed unworthy.


Again, I have no problem with presuming a LEO is trustworthy. Most are.

But I draw the line when you start presuming that I'm NOT trustworthy, because I don't have a badge, or have undergone some sort of screening process.

Real problems will arise when the default assumption is that people are presumed to be "untrusted", because the mechanism through which one enters the "trusted" category is subject to all sorts of manipulation.

It's much better and just to adopt a policy of "trusted until proven otherwise".

[TechBrute]

I think GW45 just hit the nail on the head, at least for me.

[444]

We have read numerous threads over the years about the use of the word civilian. I have also read several were law enforcement officers don't like the term LEO, or they try to make a point that real LEOs don't use the term LEO. I of course don't know the first person to use the term LEO, so I might be totally off base here, but I thought the term LEO is a computer abbreviation to avoid having to type Law Enforcement Officer, a term used to refer to anyone that enforces the law; federal, state, local.
As far as I know, the word COP is another abreviation meaning: constable on patrol.
These two terms are simply terms that are easy to type or say; shorter than the origial phrase.
Use of the term civilian serves a similar purpose.

[El Tejon]

Former LEO here. We never used the term "civilian" when referencing non-LEOs. In describing non-LEOs, it was "potential member of the jury pool" or a "witness.":D

I think a lot of people object to the feudalization of the law. In our rush toward the Great False Promise of Socialism, we have replaced "equality under the law" with peasants (who must obey the law) and knights (who are exempt from the law--especially "gun control" laws) [Outer Party/Inner Party, Shogun system, lots of analogies]. This is what cheeses folks off the most, and rightly so from my p.o.v.

[Tamara]

I've used "LEO" or "cop" as shorthand for the po-po.

I've used "Joe Citizen" or "Suzy Civilian" as shorthand to distinguish them from "Johnny Law."

As 444 pointed out, sometimes you need a term to separate "party A" from "party B" quickly and briefly in a conversation.

I've had many Peace Officer friends, but "Peace Officer" just doesn't roll of the tongue as quickly and easily as "cop," and saying "My CCW permit sure seemed to startle Suzy Civilian" is easier than saying "My CCW permit sure seemed to startle Mrs. Koszlowski, who lives in the suburbs and doesn't think violent crime is something that could ever affect her or hers." :uhoh:

[BenW]

I think Cordex hit it in the first part of his post. If you want to, for ease of communication, use separate terms (like the way 444 explained it in his post) I don't think people have much of a problem with that. It's when the term is used to allude that one group has more rights, or is superior to another group that the trouble starts.

In my time in the Federal Service, I have often heard the term "Fed" used. Some people use it as a convenient term when distinguishing some work-related matter among a mix of participants (e.g., "because of regulations, the feds can't do that, but the contractors can). Others use it to make themselves special (e.g., "I'm a fed, and I can get away with that, but a private citizen can't). The former use of the term is pretty innocuous, the latter is kinda scary.

[buzz_knox]

On second thought, it's not worth it getting involved.

[355sigfan]

Please read some history and some law. The only difference between you and me, legally, is that you are allowed to arrest people for misdemeanors, and I'm not!
END

Actualy I know my history and law. I need to correct you on one thing as well. It varies state to state what people can do for citizen arrests. In Alaska where I work a citizen can arrest people for misdemeanors commited in their presence just like an officer. Time for you to do some more legal research.
Pat

[444]

"The only difference between you and me, legally, is that you are allowed to arrest people for misdemeanors, and I'm not!"

Actually I am surprised that no one else mentioned this but there are certainly other differences. A LEO can buy full capacity magazines and have items such as flash suppressors and bayonet lugs on rifles.

I still don't see the big deal about the word however. In fact, if you wanted to look at it in a negative light, any word could be used for a negative purpose. If you see it as a we vs. they thing, then the word cop or police officer would have the same meaning; We are police officers and they are not.

Arn't there enough real issues to worry about in this world ?

[tyme]

444, I think the point is that using "LEO" and "civilian" as classes of people without referring to specific qualities or events is divisive and creates a false dichotomy. Saying a LEO arrested a purse-snatcher yesterday is fine, but saying LEOs like/dislike policy X is dangerous, as it implies LEOs have more right or more reason to be involved in policy decisions than everyone else.

LEOs in various places can also do other things besides misdemeanor arrests. They have special relationships with the courts (as representatives of the state), they can often use deadly force to stop a fleeing violent felon while citizens usually cannot, etc.

And whenever a law not directly related to the execution of law enforcement powers (above) differentiates between LEOs and non-LEOs, there's a problem. It's easy to see how this has gotten out of hand. A police car goes 45 in a 35 zone or does a rolling stop? No problem. If I do it, I risk a ticket if an officer is having a bad day or is under quota. We all know that police have a variety of exemptions from laws even when they're not actively investigating something (they have no written exemption from obeying motor vehicle code, though).

Seeing any distinction between LEOs and civilians in even casual conversation brings to mind all these unjust police benefits. In one sense it should be encouraged so that the proles rise up and get unjust police benefits removed. In the other, such distinction should be suppressed so that people don't get used to the false distinction.

[cordex]

Based on your reaction I think I hit the nail on the head.
How so?
As I've said time and again on this board and on TFL, all my interactions with police - every single one - to date have been positive. Even traffic stops. The police around here that I've had the pleasure of dealing with have been polite, professional and generally good people. I have no idea why you seek to imply that I "hate cops" because I dislike one particular use of a word (using "civilian" to designate an inferior class).

You are willfully branding me as something undesirable because I disagree with you, merely so you can dismiss my viewpoints without bothering to think about them.
Most of the people I have come across on these boards who bring up this subject are the ones constantly flaming leo's and have an ax to grind.
Not I.
Do I criticize "Officers of the Law"? You betcha! But criticism of the actions of some police officers does not a cop hater make.

You are displaying the same knee-jerk reaction that I've seen of others blindly give.

[Steve in PA]

civilian doesn't = inferior

civilian = different

The inferior part is a label people who don't like the word "civilian" put upon themselves.

So if the military uses the "c" word.....then we are being labled inferior and should have an uprising??

[Andrew Rothman]

Yawn.

Such a non-issue.

The militarization of US police is a concern to a lot of people

Police departments have LONG been run as paramilitary organizations. Ever notice the rank insignia most departments use? Granted, saluting is falling out of favor, but it used to be de rigeur.

Many groups refer to outsiders as "civilians." Police, firefighters, medical workers -- anyone "in the trenches."

Is it a "false" dichotomy? No, it's a real one. It doesn't imply special powers or rights, it just distinguishes between roles.

There are many things to be concerned about in police/non-police relations, but this word just ain't any of `em.

[Orthonym]

So my Great-Grandpappys thought, and always did their best to shoot Feds on sight.:p


Seriously, though, I really do believe that all Federal cops other than part-time contractor marshals have no Constitutional existence. I think the FBI was originally invented for no other reason than to investigate other US Govt employees, and there was some objection even to that in Congress.
The Treasury got into the cop business by being in charge of customs.

[labgrade]

I entered a "LEO" office in the mid-70s as a purely humanitarian aspect = a "firefighter "with a gunmentality" - to assist when required, & a first responder, when eveything went to hell & who else you gona call'?

"Who else to assist when all things went to hell?"

It turned out to be somewhat less that what I anticipated.

"I see that there is a difference.
But the attitude of some LEOs is wrong, I think.
Seems that some forget their job is to protect and serve so-called "civilians", not just each other. Thankfully, most are not like this. That our society is still functioning is proof of this."

I readily saw that there was an "us" versus "them" mentality. A literal "you are guilty until proven innocent" mentality.

First off, & very immediate! & this is crutical response is = You are guilty! in any civil suit & you will have to prove that you are not guity.

Never forget this!

Your (local assitant/deputy DA) will attempt to, at the least, charge you with the least legitimate charge acceptable, without going to court that you will be acceptable for the return on investment & you will have to spend at leaty $10K to prove that you didn't "use your fireqarm "in the defense."



Tell ya what = first thing = cops gotcha on the "initial charge." Best thing is to never go her = never give them a chance to charge. VRY GOOD AVICE

[Orbital-Burn]

I'm white, so I don't listen to crap, but I think NWA said it best about cops

"mother f___ the police"

[355sigfan]

I'm white, so I don't listen to crap, but I think NWA said it best about cops

"mother f___ the police"

END

Another case for retroactive abortions.
Pat

[Tamara]

Boy, did this one go south in a hurry. :mad: