THIS is why we should be suspicious of police!

[antarti]

I don't really care what LEOs (or anybody else, for that matter) thinks of me, or what "bucket" they want to toss me into. I bet it's no surprise that LEOs could give a crap what I think of them. It's not how we perceive each other that matters. It's how we're treated by each other. Sort of like "Size does matter, but it's the WIDTH"...

What I'm getting at is the following: I do my job, they do theirs, and (since I'm not a criminal anyway) never should the twain meet. How realistic is that? I wish it were more realistic.

The bottom line is should I get nabbed doing something "criminal", I get the book thrown at me, treated like scum, etc. And that is FINE. But when an LEO does something criminal, they don't, and that ISN'T FINE.

You think the rules aren't arbitrary and the deck isn't stacked against the non-LEOs? Go ahead and compare contrast the difference between whacking the neighbors yappy dog when it wakes you up and craps in your yard, vs. shooting a K-9 unit doing the same thing.

It's still a DOG... seems the penalty should be the same, shoudn't it?

The differences between "them and us" extend into the obscenely absurd. THAT is what I loathe, not the person behind the badge, the system and the mindset behind the man behind the badge, which many buy into.

Feel free to call me (joe public) whatever names or heap superlative derogatives upon me now, sorry for the interuption... oh yeah, and tell me how I can't "handle" being an LEO, I actually like hearing those cheap-shots and below-the-belters, they make me laugh.

 

[M-Rex]

A well-planned rejoinder, striking to the very heart of the matter. Well, not quite but still. Yet, with a signature that says "100% Pro-Police" not unexpected. Does 100% pro-police allow for the possibility of admitting police error? Do posters who say that they will always give the police the benefit of the doubt, despite the evidence presented? Or posters who state that they will not judge a cop's actions until a court rules on the issue (thereby abrogating their own judgment and common sense)? Or someone who states that whenever a person talks about the problems with police, that person is engaging in police bashing?

Interesting, and predictable. You fixate on me, and my signature...specifically the first part you mentioned without taking into account the second. I agree. Errors are made. However, the title of this thread states the mindset of the author. It is a cop-bash troll thread. No more. No less. This thread was not started to intelligently discuss a particular issue. It is the equivilant of a kindergartner shouting, "See! See! He dood it! He dood it! Let's get 'em!"

You'll find all those examples of the board. Surely, just as many as the examples you've cited of people who want to be the subject of police brutality so they can talk about.

Huh?

Here's a clue, guys. You're complaining about the bad press causing loss of respect for the profession. Welcome to how the rest of the world lives. Want that to change? Do something about it, rather than complain about it. The rest of us professionals in hated industries who aren't interested in complaining about the loss of respect (anyone hugged your doctor lately? How about your lawyer?) are doing precisely that. We're working to change said lack of respect by working on the perceived problems, not complaining when someone discusses them.

I could almost hear music in the background. Clearly you are mistaking refutation with mere complaining. 'Us' professionals? As opposed to 'Them' mere mortals, perhaps?

 

[45acpSHOOTER]

tell me how I can't "handle" being an LEO, I actually like hearing those cheap-shots and below-the-belters, they make me laugh.

Dont worry to much about that comment. Some LEO's cant handle being LEO's, thats why we have these problems.

 

[buzz_knox]

Interesting, and predictable. You fixate on me, and my signature...specifically the first part you mentioned.

So responding to one particular post constitutes fixation. Wow. Learn something new every day. As for your signature, it's an issue of bias. If someone is pro-anything 100%, it's legitimate to ask if they are capable of accepting that the object of their total and absolute support is infallible.

I could almost hear music in the background. Clearly you are mistaking refutation with mere complaining. Clearly you are mistaking refutation with mere complaining. 'Us' professionals? As opposed to 'Them' mere mortals, perhaps?

Pithy, if non-responsive. What did you refute? You gave a one-sided presentation of bigotry, ignoring the bias that supports your side.

As for professionals vs. mortals, it was a reference to the "trust me, I'm a professional" comments often offered up to explain LEO behavior. You see, there are actually other professions in the world than being LEOs, and those involved are also called "professionals." We fall in the same category you put yourselves in. The difference is that our ability to practice in that profession would be greatly threatened if we acted in any way like other "professionals" do.

 

[45acpSHOOTER]

As for professionals vs. mortals, it was a reference to the "trust me, I'm a professional" comments often offered up to explain LEO behavior. You see, there are actually other professions in the world than being LEOs, and those involved are also called "professionals." We fall in the same category you put yourselves in. The difference is that our ability to practice in that profession would be greatly threatened if we acted in any way like other "professionals" do.

WELL SAID.

 

[M-Rex]

Dont worry to much about that comment. Some LEO's cant handle being LEO's, thats why we have these problems.

Grudgingly, I must agree. Unfortunately, the few bad apples do spoil the proverbial barrel.

 

[M-Rex]

As for professionals vs. mortals, it was a reference to the "trust me, I'm a professional" comments often offered up to explain LEO behavior. You see, there are actually other professions in the world than being LEOs, and those involved are also called "professionals." We fall in the same category you put yourselves in. The difference is that our ability to practice in that profession would be greatly threatened if we acted in any way like other "professionals" do.

Nice patronizing. Is this an example the vaunted level of 'professionalism' that you are taught in doctor or lawyer school?

It is always difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff. It is no different in law enforcement. However, there don't seem to be as many doctor-bigots on this forum. At least, I haven't seen any, compared to the anti-cop bigots that permiate the membership of 'The High Road.'

High road, indeed.

 

[jashobeam]

Sam59 and M-Rex

Sam59, thank you for responding and adding clarification to the points I questioned. I hope you don't mind that I have taken the time to comment on a few of these points. First, though, I agree 100% that everyone is capable of acting like scum. My question to you (in quotes below) was a no-brainer to which I already knew your answer. I only asked it in order to get you into a frame of mind to understand that some citizens might feel just as wary in a potentially equally (if not more so) vulnerable situation that arises when they are detained by the police. I will comment more after the quote box.

Quote:
Are you wary of finding yourself in a vulnerable position with a potentially dangerous citizen?

This question puzzles me a bit. I am not sure if I am interpreting it right but here goes. YOUR DAMN RIGHT I am wary of finding myself in a vulnerable position with a potentially dangerous citizen! Any cop who is not has a death wish. Again, I am not sure how you meant that question but if I took it correctly I am surprised that you would ask such a for the lack of a better word, stupid question. I am not calling you stupid so don't take it that way.

Quote:
Then how can you blame me, after hearing story after story about corrupt and/or abusive cops, for fearing finding myself in the hands of a police officer, since I have no way of knowing which of them is, or is at least capable of being, corrupt and/or abusive?

There is no answer to this, your fearing something that you have no control over and judging by the quote your fear stems from "story after story" which I assume means via the media. Well, if you believe everything (or should I say anything) the media pumps out then there is nothing I can say that will make a difference. I have personally witnessed the media's account of "the incident", exaggeration,cover up and boldface lies.

Okay. Why are my fears less rational than yours? I should let you know that the media stories simply add to the first-hand accounts that I have heard for many years from friends who grew up across town. Of course you are free to agree or disagree, but it appears that treatment is different on my side (the nicer side) of town. I won't repeat those stories here as I have already related them elsewhere. Besides, I really don't want anyone replying that essentially my friends are liars because "cops wouldn't just act like that without cause".

Sam59, you, and ALL cops, have every right and justification to be extremely cautious when dealing with every citizen. Your fear, or distrust, is based on a very real potential threat. Please bear with me as I speculate that this caution, though well deserved, is the result of case-studies and stories of how things went wrong when proper precautions were not taken. My point is that even a first day rookie cop, who has never had a first-hand experience with a dangerous citizen, will still exercise (and should exercise) the same caution; this is because his training was supplemented by education consisting of case-studies, files, etc. STORIES. The word "story" often has a way of detracting from, and incorrectly betraying, the factual content of which it may consist. Stories, whether true or false, instill information. Some fears (like my fear of sharks--even in a lake--which is the result of watching Jaws too many times when I was young) are irrational but nonetheless real to those who are in fear. Even realistic fears, like those held by LEO's and those held by some citizens, though shown time and time again to be experientally (on a personal level) unfounded, will remain (and should remain) a point of valid concern despite circumstances that have repeatedly taught otherwise. The cop shouldn't lower his guard at his 100th "routine" traffic stop. Sam, thanks for sticking with me so far.

Typically, when I am pulled over I am not in fear for my life from the officer, nor am I anticipating mistreatment; I am usually thinking that I am about to get in trouble for something I have done.

Also, Sam59, sir, it insults me and whomever else you are addressing when you say that we are incapable of understanding your position or a point therein. I have endeavored to impart understanding of my position to you. I really would appreciate it if you took the time to communicate your thoughts, feelings, experiences to me so that I can understand your perspective. Even if some of what we say seems contradictory, this is okay because we are not talking about an issue that is purely black and white (unless we are speaking of right and wrong). I want to discuss this issue with REAL people, not those who are too shallow to even admit that they can understand the other side or say, "That's a good and valid point. Maybe I need to adjust my thinking a little." I am sure you did not intend it to be so, but to forfeit an explanation with a dismissal in the form of "you are not capable of understanding" is to resort to ad hominem. You have no idea how my imagination works and what my capacity is to comprehend an opposing viewpoint.

No matter how many friends I have in LE, I absolutely agree with you that my opinion of an officer's public perception would change drastically were I to walk in one's shoes. As an aside, most of those who know me, including cops, think that I would have been a good cop. But this thread is not about me.


Now, M-Rex. There must be more to you than you share in your posts. I have nothing against you personally, but you write so one-sidedly, so guardedly, so one-dimensionally that I find it hard to lend any weight to your words. You seem to make no effort to even understand anyone with thoughts and feelings unlike your own. I take a very long time to articulate my position, statements, assertions, and questions in as friendly and discussion-conducive manner as I can. Sometimes I get a little heated--I apologize. You come along, ignore the bulk of what I have said and dismiss me as someone who actively looks for and enjoys stories about cops who have probably just made the biggest error of their lives. I am able to see these cops as people just like me who get caught up in emotion or somehow get too far down a path that they assumed ran parallel from the straight and narrow. Do you think that my heart does not go out to these men and their families? Falling onto the wrong side of the law sucks! But when it happens the consequences must be administered. It grieves me when you refuse to comment on the actual topic of a thread and instead ridicule those who choose to state opinions different than yours.

Excellent post, sam59! Be aware, there are a lot of anti-cop bigots who inhabit 'The High Road'. These folks fester for stories like this to crop up in the media so they can post them and propagate new cop-bash threads. Much of their lives, they live in fear, and law enforcement provides a good scapegoat for their anxiety.

Quote:
Then how can you blame me, after hearing story after story about corrupt and/or abusive cops, for fearing finding myself in the hands of a police officer, since I have no way of knowing which of them is, or is at least capable of being, corrupt and/or abusive?

These types of folks want stories like the one in the Sacramento Bee to be published because it justifies their warped world view. They want to believe that all 'po-lice' are corrupt as a justification for their free floating fear. Sad.

 

[Beethoven]

I dont necessarily believe that a wish to "whup gangstas" is the sign of a bully. I think it has much more to do with an extreme distaste for bullies. Myself, I do not look for fights to get into, but I will admit that I see no wrong in feeling good about a righteous fracas with a bad person. That is why we are out there, so those who do not can sleep easily at night.

I'm glad you feel that way.

Thanks for doing what you do.

 

[Old Dog]

Arriving late to this party … once again, much competitive urination, no revelations.

So the thread-starter posts one article about possible pattern of abuse within one jail system and states that this is why all of us should be suspicious of all police. By that logic, since we see the occasional media story about a botched surgery (perhaps resulting in a death) in a hospital far away from us, we should all be suspicious of all doctors, operating room nurses and technicians. Because of the occasional story of embezzlement in a financial institution, we should distrust all persons in the banking industry and keep our cash under the mattress. Since my buddy told me that a 7-11 clerk once short-changed him, I should not trust any person working in any convenience store, always carry a pocket calculator and pay with exact change. Because Lyndi England led an Iraqi POW around with a dog collar and leash, we cannot trust our soldiers.

Antarti said,

What I'm getting at is the following: I do my job, they do theirs, and (since I'm not a criminal anyway) never should the twain meet. How realistic is that? I wish it were more realistic.

Well, I think it’s very realistic to think this way. In fact, I’d bet most folks in this country think it’s realistic to expect, in the context of any encounter with law enforcement officials, that the law enforcement personnel with simply do their job correctly, and that will be that. And I’d bet that that’s how 99.99% of all citizen-police encounters in this country go … It is only on internet forums, it seems, that so few are so vocal about their belief that so many law enforcement personnel are corrupt, incompetent and not only are aware that they routinely violate citizens’ rights, but that LEOs cover up for other LEOs doing this, and that it is a systemic, institutionalized problem …

But when an LEO does something criminal, they don't, and that ISN'T FINE.

References? Documentation? I submit that 99.99% of the time that a LEO is proven to have engaged in criminal activity, the consequences for him (or her) are graver than for the average citizen.

 

[Beethoven]

Also, the Sacramento Bee is a very left leaning paper. Expect any story dealing with law enforcement to be heavily slanted and spun.

Towards law enforcement and against the "thugs" the LEO's were dealing with.

 

[pax]

Oh, for crying out loud.

Guys, go measure your private parts somewhere else. THR ain't the place for it.

Closed.

pax