I feel, speaking from my personal experience as an LEO we do fear “some” of the public and for a good reason.
When was the last time you had your car pelted with bricks or beer bottles, while on patrol?
{edited}
I can answer yes to all of these and yes we do have a good reason to be suspicious of the public.
The last time? I'll admit it's been awhile. Probably about 3 years now. I did work for a mental health hospital though. My duties involved traveling to "the poor and disadvantaged among socio-economically destabilized public housing" (that was actually written in one of our company flyers) and providing "expert advice on mental health problems among our client base" {quote BS company line unquote}.
I handled crack baby cases. Kids hearing voices. Clients who had murdered other people. Drugs addicts. Sexually abused 5 year old girls (I hope you have never experienced, and can't imagine, what it feels like to interview a sexually abused 5 year old). And tons of gang kids. BGD, Crips...you name it and I've done it.
So picture everything that you described to me as having happened to you, and then imagine that you had to go into those same neighborhoods armed only with your winning smile and a size eight by eleven wooden clipboard.
And I pissed off quite a few of my clients. One of my classic lines was "If you stay in a gang you'll either be in jail or dead by age 25." The leaders in the gangs didn't like me saying these things to their recruits. They leaned on me hard a few times.
Am I right in assuming that you don't encounter these types of attacks in EVERY neighborhood that you patrol? Aren't some neighborhoods better than others? That was certainly my experience while on the job.
To clarify my earlier statements: I do think that there has developed among the police community a belief that it's "us versus them". Almost a militarized view of the public. The public is seen as somehow
constantly threatening the police, and
constantly concerned with trying to kill police officers. To me, the statistics just don't bear this out. The number of officers killed in the line of duty has stayed within the 130-200 range for the last decade. I'm told by my relatives (police officers all) that the 1970's was the time to be scared if you were a police officer. This is what they tell me. If the public was ACTIVELY moving against the police, there would be a LOT more policemen being killed. For that matter, there would be a lot more of the public being killed as well.
(Of course, I could be wrong. If you are
personally seeing a lot more public outcry/violence against the police while on the job then ignore what I'm saying. But then ask yourself "why is the public turning against us?" If you figure that one out then you'll make Officer of the Year, I'm sure.)
Are certain segments of the public going to attack police officers? Yes...and they always have. That's why you grow trees in your front lawn as a barrier to gun fire, and keep a 870 with mag extention next to the door.
It wasn't much different in Wyatt Earp's day.
But those same sections of society that MIGHT attack the police are also the same sections that know the COSTS of attacking the police. Would you really want to be a gang banger in a gang that was at war with the police???!!!! "Hey...he resisted arrest...what could I do? That's when I shot the gang leader 95 times, your Honor."
As an aside: Do you know who is most likely to shoot a police officer? A relative, an ex-wife, or himself (suicide). Sad but true...and exactly like 99% of the rest of society.
No, I think what bothered me most about the privledged address that police were being allowed on the 4473 was that it was designed to further separate you guys from the public. It was another one of those "differences" that cops are allowed to have. Truthfully, I don't see why you guys don't have to jump thru the same hoops that we do. If it is good enough for the rest of society, then it ought to be good enough for you guys as well. Anything else just fosters that whole "it's the thin blue line versus the rabble" mentality. Even my relatives are guilty of this attitude on occasion.
The second post I posted earlier was intended as a cautionary reminder of this. Many police officers have no problem with repealing the second amendment....as long as THEY are allowed to keep their firearms. "Us vs. them" again. I wanted to point out that TPTB don't necessarily want a strongly armed police force anymore than they want a strongly armed civilian population. Thus my point about some police organizations in Europe only allowing their officers to be armed while on duty.
I do know that a lot of people are nervous about the direction of both our laws, and the various powers that LEO's are being given under these laws. Where that will go, in both political terms and how hard it is for you on the streets, I can't know.
What I'd like to say is that there really isn't a difference between you fellow citizen humans that wear blue and us fellow citizen humans that don't. Perpetuating the idea that there IS a difference is only going to further isolate the police and the public from one another. That's how fear and envy arise.
Results: Who can say? More LA riots?...New York Jamacian immigrants gunned down in the streets?...worse?....I don't know. I think isolation from the public is a bad idea for both the public AND the police though.