dealing with out-of-line police officers.
- Thread starter Krenn
- Start date
- Status
Old Dog
Member
??
Oh, come on now. If you graduated elementary school, you most definitely have an idea of any laws that you might be breaking simply by living your life that would be likely to result in an encounter with law enforcement. If you are so common-sense challenged that you can't "simply live your life" without having an idea of what laws you "might" be breaking, your life is gonna be pretty difficult ...
M-Rex
member
Last edited:
Old Dog said:
Now that's funny. One of the first things they teach in law school is that no one, not even lawyers, knows what all the laws of a jursidiction are.
I've seen DAs use archaic laws to get what they want. You haven't? If so, you must not be as up on the law as you imply.
I'd say if you spent a week documenting your activities, you could find more than a few instances where (with perfect knowledge of the law and a bit of honesty), you'd have to admit you would have had a police encounter if a cop had been around when you did the activity.
The corollary problem is that even if citizens know the law, a lot of cops don't. I've seen cops sell LEO mags during the Assault Weapons Ban era because they thought the ban only applied to the first sale, not possession. More than a few of us have seen cops who've said a perfectly legal activity was illegal because either 1) the law changed and they didn't keep current or 2) the cop assumed/was told/felt that something was illegal.
Old Dog
Member
Buzz, I refer you to the BOLDED portion of my statement.
We have not been speaking of archaic laws; we have been speaking of the routine citizen-police officer encounters -- now, if you chose to believe that most, or even many, of these encounters (of which there are thousands daily in this country) result from police officers attempting to enforce archaic laws, have at it ...
Nope, I don't think so.
But the "routine citizen-police officer encounters" turn out fine for officers, yet you train for and expect the worst for the nonroutine citizen-police encounters turn disastrous. Correct? Why is it any different for us?
It's the nonroutine encounter where the archaic laws turn potentially dangerous for us civilians, where an officer or DA more familiar with some of the esoteric laws decides that there's justification for an encounter of some kind. And where the cop's imperfect knowledge of the law is equally dangerous. The problems that "would be likely to result in an encounter with law enforcement" that would go wrong for an ordinary citizen could very well come from a cop who needed an excuse or got it wrong, combined with a citizen who "knew" (or actually did know) that they'd commited no crime and made the mistake of protesting the arrest. Challenge the cop's authority in any way, and you now have the issue under discussion.
As for being sure that you're not violating a law, I'm happy for you. You've clearly mastered the myriad state and federal criminal and environmental laws. You've done something no DA or US Attorney has ever done.
It's the nonroutine encounter where the archaic laws turn potentially dangerous for us civilians, where an officer or DA more familiar with some of the esoteric laws decides that there's justification for an encounter of some kind. And where the cop's imperfect knowledge of the law is equally dangerous. The problems that "would be likely to result in an encounter with law enforcement" that would go wrong for an ordinary citizen could very well come from a cop who needed an excuse or got it wrong, combined with a citizen who "knew" (or actually did know) that they'd commited no crime and made the mistake of protesting the arrest. Challenge the cop's authority in any way, and you now have the issue under discussion.
As for being sure that you're not violating a law, I'm happy for you. You've clearly mastered the myriad state and federal criminal and environmental laws. You've done something no DA or US Attorney has ever done.
WvaBill
Member
Old Dog said:
It's like watching a house fire.
Powderman
Member
Oh, for PETE'S sake, people!!
Why do I get the distinct feeling that you all are looking for ANY excuse to bash law enforcement? You are NOT clear on the concept.
For an example, there is a law in the State of Washington (soon to be removed from the books) called "Slander of Woman".
This means that if you call a woman a round heeled trollop--even though she may be actively engaged in the business of sex for money--you have just committed a misdemeanor! Yes, you can be arrested for misdemeanors.
Does that mean that you are arrested in this state every time you refer to a female by any other means other than her name? Get real.
Do you know how many times I (and other officers) conduct traffic stops and DON'T give citations?
A couple of examples:
1. Had an incident once where on a two lane road, I pulled up behind a line of about 20 cars. The speed limit on the road was 55. The cars were moving at 25. I passed individual cars until I got to the first one, and pulled him over. It was a 70 year old gentleman out with his wife for a drive on a nice day--the car was at least 40 years old, but looked mint. I simply told him that he needed to drive closer to the speed limit--or be prepared to pull over to let other cars pass.
2. 16 year old prep school student in dad's car, with girlfriend, in the woods. During school hours. With marijuana in his pocket. And, a 3 foot tall bong in the trunk.
What would have been gained by busting the kid and his girl? Sure, it would have been a good VUCSA pop--there was at LEAST an ounce. But, what would have been really accomplished? Ruining the life of a young kid for a small time bust? I don't think so.
Instead, I made him dump the green stuff, dance around in it, smash the bong--and then call his father, and tell him EXACTLY what he was doing, with whom, and who was standing there at the time. That had LOTS more corrective value, I am sure.
Some of you are the same ones who say stuff like "Oh, if I see someone being assaulted/shot/stabbed/raped/(fill in the blank), I would leave the area/call the police/not get involved because my CCW is for MY protection and my family's protection. Instead, I would get clear and call the cops.
Why call us at all, if you distrust us so much?
Here's something to chew on. Why don't you all move into the same area. Form a town or small city and incorporate. It can be done, you know.
Then ensure that you do NOT form a police department. Moreover, do NOT accept any offers of police services from your county or neighboring jurisdictions. Finally, post your small town totally off limits to anyone even associated with law enforcement.
Why not? After all, you have ALL the answers, and we're such bad guys anyway. Just do away with law enforcement in your little corner of the world.
Why do I get the distinct feeling that you all are looking for ANY excuse to bash law enforcement? You are NOT clear on the concept.
For an example, there is a law in the State of Washington (soon to be removed from the books) called "Slander of Woman".
This means that if you call a woman a round heeled trollop--even though she may be actively engaged in the business of sex for money--you have just committed a misdemeanor! Yes, you can be arrested for misdemeanors.
Does that mean that you are arrested in this state every time you refer to a female by any other means other than her name? Get real.
Do you know how many times I (and other officers) conduct traffic stops and DON'T give citations?
A couple of examples:
1. Had an incident once where on a two lane road, I pulled up behind a line of about 20 cars. The speed limit on the road was 55. The cars were moving at 25. I passed individual cars until I got to the first one, and pulled him over. It was a 70 year old gentleman out with his wife for a drive on a nice day--the car was at least 40 years old, but looked mint. I simply told him that he needed to drive closer to the speed limit--or be prepared to pull over to let other cars pass.
2. 16 year old prep school student in dad's car, with girlfriend, in the woods. During school hours. With marijuana in his pocket. And, a 3 foot tall bong in the trunk.
What would have been gained by busting the kid and his girl? Sure, it would have been a good VUCSA pop--there was at LEAST an ounce. But, what would have been really accomplished? Ruining the life of a young kid for a small time bust? I don't think so.
Instead, I made him dump the green stuff, dance around in it, smash the bong--and then call his father, and tell him EXACTLY what he was doing, with whom, and who was standing there at the time. That had LOTS more corrective value, I am sure.
Some of you are the same ones who say stuff like "Oh, if I see someone being assaulted/shot/stabbed/raped/(fill in the blank), I would leave the area/call the police/not get involved because my CCW is for MY protection and my family's protection. Instead, I would get clear and call the cops.
Why call us at all, if you distrust us so much?
Here's something to chew on. Why don't you all move into the same area. Form a town or small city and incorporate. It can be done, you know.
Then ensure that you do NOT form a police department. Moreover, do NOT accept any offers of police services from your county or neighboring jurisdictions. Finally, post your small town totally off limits to anyone even associated with law enforcement.
Why not? After all, you have ALL the answers, and we're such bad guys anyway. Just do away with law enforcement in your little corner of the world.
Joejojoba111
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2005
- Messages
- 1,056
I have a theory, would you like to see it?
It seems to me that this was an interesting discussion, people proposing different ideas in a calm and purposeful manner.
And then one and then anothe and another poster entered, and with their first posts began to side-track the discussion.
With Powderman in particular, every post he makes he asserts the 'us versus them' analogy. He uses almost exactly those words, too.
Historically, on this forum, when a thread becomes 'us versus them' it is closed. These boys are not stupid, and I think they may have seen the trend.
Thus, I mean no offence, but I believe the THR community should view their posts with skepticism. Imo it is most likely that they are 'trolling'. In fact you even have good-cop bad-cop trolling. 1 is baiting you, joking about beating Rodney King and such, and the other is switching you, turning the conversation into 'us verus them'.
They clearly understand the thread, and they clearly are not posting about dealing with out of line police officers. There posts are disruptive, and in my opinion they are simply trying to have the thread closed.
I suggest that an attitude of patience and skepticism be used to deal with this. Obviously some of their posts may be too much to ignore, but the longer you can ignor them the longer the thread will stay open.
It seems to me that this was an interesting discussion, people proposing different ideas in a calm and purposeful manner.
And then one and then anothe and another poster entered, and with their first posts began to side-track the discussion.
With Powderman in particular, every post he makes he asserts the 'us versus them' analogy. He uses almost exactly those words, too.
Historically, on this forum, when a thread becomes 'us versus them' it is closed. These boys are not stupid, and I think they may have seen the trend.
Thus, I mean no offence, but I believe the THR community should view their posts with skepticism. Imo it is most likely that they are 'trolling'. In fact you even have good-cop bad-cop trolling. 1 is baiting you, joking about beating Rodney King and such, and the other is switching you, turning the conversation into 'us verus them'.
They clearly understand the thread, and they clearly are not posting about dealing with out of line police officers. There posts are disruptive, and in my opinion they are simply trying to have the thread closed.
I suggest that an attitude of patience and skepticism be used to deal with this. Obviously some of their posts may be too much to ignore, but the longer you can ignor them the longer the thread will stay open.
308win
Member
I'm thinking you are setting yourself up for one of those "gee, I really wish I hadn't done that, what the **** was I thinking moments.
Actually you are paid to be a government servant. Just like a sheep dog works for his master the shepherd and not the sheep the police work for the government not us (as more than one THR LEO has stated in more than one thread). And no Old Dog the government isn't us. The government stopped being us about 145 years ago.
In more than one thread THR LEO's have stated they just enforce the laws they don't make them and you do so whether the laws are just or not. So don't even try to pass off that LEO's are public servants. That's just a feel good spin phrase to mollify the sheep.
Actually that's exactly what you're paid for so the sheep won't have to be. The police are the buffers, the shield between the bad guys and the public and with that comes risk. LEO's don't have to like it but it comes with the job. It is what happens when you have to deal with the dregs of society on a regular basis. If it didn't then we wouldn't need to pay someone to do the job police officers do since it wouldn't be an unpleasant/hazardous task.
LEO's sign on knowing that they will be dealing with the dregs, that they will get shot at and maybe even killed. Anyone who signs on as a police officer who doesn't know that and hasn't dealt with and accepted that possibility before he takes the oath is either stupid or living in some kind of dream world. You guys know what you're signing on for. Deal with it or get a new job.
AND FOR GOD'S SAKE stop whining about it when the sheep notice you all aren't sheep dogs and some are wolves. Deal with the wolves among you - quickly - and finally instead of making excuses for them and even protecting them and you might find that the sheep stop fearing you and actually respect and admire you.
M-Rex
member
Powderman said:
Powderman, I absolutely love your posts. +100!
M-Rex
member
Werewolf said:
Wrong. Here's the part of the oath of office that deals with your example.
Moving on...
Yes. These are the laws that 'the sheep' enact for themselves via the legislative process and initiative, referendum, and recall.
So?
Spoken with the brawling pseudo-courage of an office cubicle warrior. Though, I had made the assumption, based on other posts, that you once served our great nation, I am rather disappointed by your incessant blathering and 'us-vs.-them-ism'. I would have thought you would know better, or at least, been able to show more respect.
Interesting. Not one 'cop' on this forum (that I have seen, anyway) has made any excuses for nefarious LEO behavior...only responded to the obligatory cop bashing that results from these inane posts. Yet you (and others) insist that LEO's make excuses for every bad act. It has been said that no one is harder on a 'dirty cop' than the 'good cops'. In my experience, that axiom is true. Those few (very few) people who abuse the authority they've been entrusted with are quickly and vehemently dealt with. Just because some of them are not paraded across the evening news does not mean it is not happening. It is clear that you (and others) operate with a pre-conceived viewpoint of how LEO's act, and what LEO's do, and you simply force fit every news story, every rumored beating, and every public contact with an LEO to mesh with your world view. You are not interested in facts. Your mind is already made up. Pitiful.
One wonders...what do you guys do when you come across a rogue financial analyst cooking up books somewhere?
I wonder if the LEO's in the NO video showing them taking part in the looting took this oath or the ones that threw an old lady up against a wall when she showed them her revolver or the ones who deserted? If they did they certainly didn't uphold it. Is New Orleans an isolated incident? Hardly.M-Rex said:
Deal with the issue and stop the ad hominen attacks. The issue is that a cop's job involves danger, disrespect, long hard hours - all of that and more come with the job. Cops are the buffer between civilized people and those who aren't. What's so freaking hard to understand about that? Only a whiney crybaby complains about something they voluntarily signed up for.M-Rex said:
I couldn't go into a bar or club in the early 70's in uniform without some yahoo getting in my face about Vietnam. Those yahoos made me feel like crap but when I joined in '71 I knew the military was a despised institution. I went in with eyes open. I dealt with it.
When I joined the military I knew that the possibility I might get killed existed. I joined with open eyes. When the job took me to a freaking revolution in Lagos, Nigeria in 1978 I didn't like it but I didn't complain about it either - IT CAME WITH THE FREAKING JOB.
What the hell makes cops so special that they expect to be treated with fawning respect by the people they deal with all the time - the dregs. It ain't gonna happen. The cops do a dirty, risky job. Someone's gotta do it but if you expect to be loved for it forget it. Not gonna happen now or ever - unless the cops clean their own houses.
There's an old saying to the effect that all it takes to ruin a barrel of apples is one rotten one. The same holds true of cops. One rotten one reflects on the whole force. People don't focus on the good they focus on the bad. Good won't hurt 'em. Bad will!
If as you claim the cops do clean their own house but don't publicize it then they should. The people the good cops claim to be serving need to know that the bad cops are being rooted out and eliminated. Otherwise what are the people supposed to think. I'll tell ya what they think. They think the worse. That's human nature.
I have a great deal of respect for the individual police officer and the difficult job he or she does when they do it honestly and with honor. I believe that as individuals 99.5% of police officers do their jobs just that way.
But that .5% that doesn't ruins the barrel because I don't have a clue which individuals are the rotten apples and so I have no respect for the institution as a whole that won't clean it's own house, that enforces unjust laws, gets a free ride when they brutalize citizens, that believes it is an elite and privelidged part of society.
If the police want to be admired and respected then they need to act in an admirable and respectable manner.
Respect and admiration must be earned. The fact that so many people lack both respect and admiration for the institution of police is prima-facie evidence that something isn't right somewhere, somehow and somewhen.
Like they say, where there's smoke there's fire...
M-Rex
member
Werewolf said:
One wonders....
...John Kerry admitted to committing atrocities during his stint in the armed forces, during the same timeframe that you served. Does that mean that he was a 'rotten apple' and that his actions reflect on you? Is your honorable service now sullied because of his misuse of his authority? Should I trust you? Furthermore, should I just assume that every member of the armed forces I know, including members of my own family, are (or were) simply bloodlusting demi-demons just waiting for the chance to rape, plunder and pillage? Should I trust them, or should I just assume they want to cut out my heart?
I mean, after all...where there's smoke there's fire...
I think you get my point.
And...seriously. What do you guys do when some financial analyst cooks the books, say...for some mobster, or corrupt corporation? Do you folks just look the other way?
Joejojoba111
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2005
- Messages
- 1,056
To bring this back on topic, and away from us vs them (which both sides are engaging in);
I think your posts shows good thinking. You found a relevant example, not exactly the same, but a sensitive issue to be sure.
In response to your post, you should take it all the way. Don't view it as a citizen welcoming back soldiers to America, pretend you are a Vietnamese woman in a grass-hut villiage. Now, not all American soldiers are going to kill and rape, but some might.
Do you advise this woman to stick her head in the sand? What would you advise her to do? Run, fight, submit?
Now, same situation, except the woman cannot resist and she cannot retreat.
Perhaps recording the situation would be an idea. And there you are, back to the original poster's topic. So if I could ask those with the chips on their shoulders to please take their messiah complexes to a thread they could start just for that purpose, please continue the original discussion.
I think the topic is good, and if this thread has been killed, perhaps the originator could start another along the same lines (but request moderators to *police it closely).
I think your posts shows good thinking. You found a relevant example, not exactly the same, but a sensitive issue to be sure.
In response to your post, you should take it all the way. Don't view it as a citizen welcoming back soldiers to America, pretend you are a Vietnamese woman in a grass-hut villiage. Now, not all American soldiers are going to kill and rape, but some might.
Do you advise this woman to stick her head in the sand? What would you advise her to do? Run, fight, submit?
Now, same situation, except the woman cannot resist and she cannot retreat.
Perhaps recording the situation would be an idea. And there you are, back to the original poster's topic. So if I could ask those with the chips on their shoulders to please take their messiah complexes to a thread they could start just for that purpose, please continue the original discussion.
I think the topic is good, and if this thread has been killed, perhaps the originator could start another along the same lines (but request moderators to *police it closely).
M-Rex
member
Joejojoba111 said:
You are right. Thread drift.
As far as recording, I think that's a good idea. If nothing else, a person will have some interesting video to watch. It may even vindicate the officer(s).
Powderman
Member
OK, let's see if we can successfully translate.
Translation: Cops suck.
Translation: Cops suck, until every corrupt or bullying officer is eliminated. Since they never will be, cops suck.
By the way, using this reason I can say that the military sucks, too! After all, there are rapists, thieves, murderers and other criminals that have emerged from the ranks of the military. So, I'm sorry to say, soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines suck, too.
Oh, by the way, the Coast Guard sucks too. Since they perform a law enforcement function as part of their job, they suck like Hoover vacuum cleaners.
Translation (if one is even needed): Cops suck.
Translation: A small acknowledgement that the VAST majority of police officers are NOT corrupt--but since there are perhaps 1 in 500 that might be corrupt--maybe even less--cops still suck.
As far as enforcing unjust laws, why did YOU allow them to get put on the books anyway? You have three Constitutional tools--the petition, the referendum and the recall--to have unjust laws removed, to have good laws enacted, and to have bad politicians removed from office. Yes, you can use them. Yes, any citizen can. No, you don't have to have a lot of money. Contact Tim Eyman, in Washington State, about how it's done.
By the way--cops still suck.
No cop wants to be fawned on. No cop wants to be put on a pedestal. However, when it gets to the point when the only time you want us around is to take care of the dirty work--and as soon as that is over you want to disband us, push us to the side, and have open discussions on how to neutralize our efforts, make us look like clowns, and in some rare cases even attack, injure, maim or kill us, how do you think we're going to think of YOU?
A prudent person will not attempt to pet a dog that growls constantly, no matter how adorable the dog might be. Yes, if the dog were in trouble and you could do something about it, you will usually help the dog. Most people will. But you will leave the dog alone as soon as it growls.
Threads like this usually talk about things like the "blue wall of silence", and the fact (yes, it is a fact) that cops sometimes allow other cops to slide on minor offenses--as long as they do NOT become a pattern, and there is no willful disregard for the law. So, let's see--again, referring to traffic tickets, I have pulled over about 50 or so vehicles in the last few months. Two of those were police officers. 48 were regular joes or janes.
How many went to jail? ONE.
That means that for every cop I did not ticket or arrest, 24 regular folks got off easy, too. I guess I'm still your super-repressive brownshirted Nazi for arresting the one person, right?
No, it's evidence on it's face that people will distrust and dislike most things that attempt to reign in their desire to do what the heck they want, when they want and how they want. Distrust of the uniform or the badge has nothing to do with it.
As far as earning respect and admiration, that is up to you and the other people we contact. But in a sense, I don't need or want your thanks OR your adulation, thank you very much.
I get my real thanks when a kid looks at me, with the wonder in their eyes that seems to be unique among children, and says, "Mommy? Daddy? That's what I want to be!"
My thanks comes when I'm at an accident scene and there's a person who might not be able to speak too well at the time--but the squeeze of the hand tells me that they know I'm there--and that I'll stay there too. Even to the last moment--when mine might be the last face they see on this earth--my thanks comes knowing that this person; torn, battered and bleeding, knows that they did not die alone.
My thanks comes when the homeowner that called because of that bump in the night sees the stranger in their yard lit up by my maglite as I'm giving them commands over the sights of my Colt. After the prowler is cuffed and stuffed, when that homeowner and/or their family says, "Thank you"--and you see the sincere thanks in their eyes--I don't need anything else.
When the mom with the van full of kids gets cut off by the car full of punks, who start flipping her off and screaming at her, my thanks comes from the look of relief I get when she sees my cruiser come out of nowhere and lights the car up to pull them over.
As a matter of fact, 99.9% of the police officers in this country get their thanks and respect in the same way. We don't need yours--you can stew in your poisons all day long, and tell us how repressive we are, too. Good for you.
Because we realize that at the end of the day, when all is said and done, that cops STILL suck--and in your eyes, will suck until the end of time.
Just call me Kirby.
Translation: Cops suck.
Translation: Cops suck, until every corrupt or bullying officer is eliminated. Since they never will be, cops suck.
By the way, using this reason I can say that the military sucks, too! After all, there are rapists, thieves, murderers and other criminals that have emerged from the ranks of the military. So, I'm sorry to say, soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines suck, too.
Oh, by the way, the Coast Guard sucks too. Since they perform a law enforcement function as part of their job, they suck like Hoover vacuum cleaners.
Translation (if one is even needed): Cops suck.
Translation: A small acknowledgement that the VAST majority of police officers are NOT corrupt--but since there are perhaps 1 in 500 that might be corrupt--maybe even less--cops still suck.
As far as enforcing unjust laws, why did YOU allow them to get put on the books anyway? You have three Constitutional tools--the petition, the referendum and the recall--to have unjust laws removed, to have good laws enacted, and to have bad politicians removed from office. Yes, you can use them. Yes, any citizen can. No, you don't have to have a lot of money. Contact Tim Eyman, in Washington State, about how it's done.
By the way--cops still suck.
No cop wants to be fawned on. No cop wants to be put on a pedestal. However, when it gets to the point when the only time you want us around is to take care of the dirty work--and as soon as that is over you want to disband us, push us to the side, and have open discussions on how to neutralize our efforts, make us look like clowns, and in some rare cases even attack, injure, maim or kill us, how do you think we're going to think of YOU?
A prudent person will not attempt to pet a dog that growls constantly, no matter how adorable the dog might be. Yes, if the dog were in trouble and you could do something about it, you will usually help the dog. Most people will. But you will leave the dog alone as soon as it growls.
Threads like this usually talk about things like the "blue wall of silence", and the fact (yes, it is a fact) that cops sometimes allow other cops to slide on minor offenses--as long as they do NOT become a pattern, and there is no willful disregard for the law. So, let's see--again, referring to traffic tickets, I have pulled over about 50 or so vehicles in the last few months. Two of those were police officers. 48 were regular joes or janes.
How many went to jail? ONE.
That means that for every cop I did not ticket or arrest, 24 regular folks got off easy, too. I guess I'm still your super-repressive brownshirted Nazi for arresting the one person, right?
No, it's evidence on it's face that people will distrust and dislike most things that attempt to reign in their desire to do what the heck they want, when they want and how they want. Distrust of the uniform or the badge has nothing to do with it.
As far as earning respect and admiration, that is up to you and the other people we contact. But in a sense, I don't need or want your thanks OR your adulation, thank you very much.
I get my real thanks when a kid looks at me, with the wonder in their eyes that seems to be unique among children, and says, "Mommy? Daddy? That's what I want to be!"
My thanks comes when I'm at an accident scene and there's a person who might not be able to speak too well at the time--but the squeeze of the hand tells me that they know I'm there--and that I'll stay there too. Even to the last moment--when mine might be the last face they see on this earth--my thanks comes knowing that this person; torn, battered and bleeding, knows that they did not die alone.
My thanks comes when the homeowner that called because of that bump in the night sees the stranger in their yard lit up by my maglite as I'm giving them commands over the sights of my Colt. After the prowler is cuffed and stuffed, when that homeowner and/or their family says, "Thank you"--and you see the sincere thanks in their eyes--I don't need anything else.
When the mom with the van full of kids gets cut off by the car full of punks, who start flipping her off and screaming at her, my thanks comes from the look of relief I get when she sees my cruiser come out of nowhere and lights the car up to pull them over.
As a matter of fact, 99.9% of the police officers in this country get their thanks and respect in the same way. We don't need yours--you can stew in your poisons all day long, and tell us how repressive we are, too. Good for you.
Because we realize that at the end of the day, when all is said and done, that cops STILL suck--and in your eyes, will suck until the end of time.
Just call me Kirby.
Joejojoba111 said:
And thus it comes full circle. Rather than ignoring the bad for the sake of the good, we focus on dealing with the bad. Gee, sounds almost like self-defense: most people won't try to harm us, so let's figure out how to deal with the ones who will, without hurting the "good ones." Now, there's a concept.
Applying that kind of logic, we needn't have worried about the Nazi's or the Communists.
1) After all, only a few were, in actuality, "bad".
2) The ones who did something "wrong" were just following orders
3) The average German or Russian had no animus against the average American
4) There were good people in both regimes who fought against the evil they saw
Think of all the lives and money that could have been saved had we just accepted the bad with the good. :banghead:
antarti said:
How do you get all that from my post? Unless you are stating that law enforcement itself is an "evil" enterprise. Granted, any cop who covers for a dirty cop is an accomplice to the crime. But that does not mean that law enforcement as a whole is to be equated with an oppressive regime. Some agencies have more problems than others, but painting everyone with that brush is a quick way to marginalize yourself in everyone's eyes.
By your logic, the fact that there are criminals in society means that you, as a member of society, are equally guilty as they.
By applying a little too much sarcasm. I am actually agreeing with you when it comes to weeding out the bad.
That doesn't square with oppressive regimes?
How often does your average neighborhood rally around a criminal and, with the help of the media, tar and feather in print the justice system?
If I have marginalized myself in satirically pointing out that:
1) Those who are sanctioned to use force are the most likely to abuse it systematically
2) The fact that not all members of a certain "party" need to behave in the same manner to be painted with broad strokes, just enough of them
3) That members of the above "party" are quick to foreswear "the bad actions of the relatively few" only after some in that minority have been caught "dead to rights" and there is no possible way to spin it otherwise
then I'll consider myself quite "marginalized". Very much so, in fact.
No, that would be "by your logic, the fact that there are criminals in society means that you are looked upon by LEOs in not much different fashion than those who are guilty"
How unrealistic eh?
- Status
