Should LEO's Have A Passing Familiarity With Laws?

[R127]

Thank you for your thoughts.

I don't see the money thing as a big issue. To my way of thinking I think the trillions sunk into Iraq would have been much better spent raising the standard of training, acceptance and salaries of our domestic law enforcement. I am not interested in a police state but if we're going to have a free society and have professional fulltime law enforcement officers then it is pretty much a necessity that be of the highest caliber and yes, have a very detailed in depth knowledge of the laws they will be enforcing. I don't think they have to be jacks of all trades. I have a brother who is an emt and they arrive on scene often before the police do so beyond basic first aid type stuff no, police don't have to be paramedics. I would say not every officer has to cover all areas of law either, it seems logical some would handle traffic, others violent crime, etc and to some extent that is how it works. Anyway I actually wouldn't mind seeing the money spent in this area if it was taken from other more questionable spending areas. Trouble is convincing the people who steal and redistribute our wealth.

I see this kind of like the focus on crime prevention. A policeman standing on a corner in a heavily traveled area looking out for real malum in se offenses is not a bad thing to have and is serving in a deterent and responsive capacity. All positive so far. When you cross the line into prevention then you inherently have to go after people who haven't and may not ever do anything wrong. It's just one of those things that drives a wedge between citizens and law enforcement, a wedge that shouldn't be there.

I actually care about this stuff quite a bit because a couple bad experiences have almost ruined my ability to see the system of law enforcement we currently have in a positive light. I'd like to have a system that works well, not have to feel like I'm in a police state and remove the gap because ideally and in most cases we really are on the same side. I'm one of those people with a mind that says sometimes if you want it done right you have to do it yourself and for quite a while now I've been seriously considering becoming an LEO myself to try and effect some change for the better. The problem I keep running into is that I know I would have no stomach for enforcing malum prohibitum and when it comes to the illegal laws that are against the constitution well forget it! I'd also be inclined to try and arrest the likes of Feinstein or Schumer for obvious reasons and that will probably always keep me out. I'd still like to believe we could see some reform that could even things out a little.

At any rate input from the other side is definately helpful and I welcome anybody else who wants to contribute. The more we discuss this the more obvious it is to me that lesser of two evils voting is in large part responsible for this mess. I guess it makes sense. When you start compromising you get compromised.

 

[tube_ee]

Not a cop, and don't hate them.

However, I have a general principle that authority and accountability must be equal.

The individual police officer that we encounter every day probably has the greatest authority that most of us will ever encounter. Ergo, they should have an equally extraordinary level of accountability. And to prevent the "old boy network" problem, that accountability must come from outside the police departments.

Cops are public servants. We, The People, are their employers. Not in some "you can't mess with me, I pay your salary" sense, but in the ultimate sense that, in a democracy/republic, all power derives from the sovereign people. This includes the police power.

Basically, when it comes to the police, my basic theory is, "your job doesn't make you special." Lots of people have dangerous jobs. I'm sure that a perusal of death statistics by profession will show a number of jobs more dangerous than being a cop. Coal miners don't get to own or use tools that I, a non-coal-miner, cannot own (assuming that I can afford them). Likewise, if I as an engineer make decisions at odds with the laws (both legal and physical) that govern what I do, I will suffer consequences for those decisions. I'll get fired, and if I'm consulting, I will be sued into oblivion. That's as it should be.

I have to know the laws. So should everybody else, no matter what they do for a living.

--Shannon

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

Coal miners don't get to own or use tools that I, a non-coal-miner, cannot own (assuming that I can afford them).

not sure about coal miners per se but there are many tools specific to certain trades that you as an engineer can't get.

and no one has to know the law, they just have to be willing to pay the price if they get nailed breaking em. and an unwillingness to see/accept that seems to bunch some folks panties. add to that the general i hate authority/father complex and some folks get right testy

 

[tube_ee]

Really?

not sure about coal miners per se but there are many tools specific to certain trades that you as an engineer can't get.

As a matter of law, rather than a manufacturer or distributor choosing (as they can, usually) not to sell them to me?

Other than explosives, what would those things be?

--Shannon

 

[Orthonym]

Fastbolt, I like yer attitude.

Physicians subscribe (or ought to) to the doctrine;

Primum, non Nocere. (First, do no harm.)

I think the policeman's motto should be,

"First, keep the Peace!"

It's been a long time since Latin class, so I dunno how that would go in that language.