My views on cops

  • 58 Replies
  • 2628 Views
My views on cops
« on: August 10, 2010, 03:53:13 PM »
Honestly, I'm not a troll. I didn't mean to come off so strong in that other thread. I'm interested in having civil discussions, so I made a thread about my views.

From what I've seen, cops are legalized thugs of the government. I'm not saying that we should get rid of cops, i know that society would fall apart without them or whatever, but power always corrupts them, even idealistic ones. I wish cops were less intrusive, less pushy, and more reasonable. I see cops using tasers on people who have done nothing but mouth off. there is no excuse for cops arresting someone and wasting time just for selling pot. And I don't like the militarization of police. Why do they call us civilians and strap on weapons every day like they're looking for a fight? Face it, they are. Cops need boards of ordinary people, not fellow cops, to review shootings and citizen complaints. They need more oversight and training.

*

Benocrates

  • 3077
  • Canadian Philosopher
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #1 on: August 10, 2010, 04:06:35 PM »
In general, I agree. I have already posted in other threads about the problems involved in militarizing the police. What I mean by that is the increasingly excessive tactical gear, leather gloves, weapon belt, soldier-like uniform, etc. Most old police officers can remember the days when a cop had only a gun and a baton. In those times many cops wouldn't feel compelled to draw their weapon at all throughout their whole career. One thing that the police must never forget is that they are citizens just like any other, but they also have a whole other set of responsibilities in their authorized use of force. I wouldn't go as far as to call them thugs of the government, but there is a slope that police are walking down that might take them, and the rest of us, into a very scary place.

Today the general logic of police officers is seemingly developing into the view that a higher level of preemptive force will prevent more violence from happening. To an extent this logic may be effective, but we can never allow these ideals and tactics to be implemented without review. One of the greatest problems, or causes for concern, is the recent developments in force technology. It seems that today police increasingly refuse to take risks in dealing with belligerent suspects, and instead opt for a shoot first (mostly taser) and ask questions later policy. We have seen this happen in many cases across the Western world, and arguably it's getting more prevalent. Of course not every cop uses these tools unethically or without concern, but the argument is that the general trend of use has moved closer toward the line of excessive and oppressive. I think the movie minority report was trying to demonstrate this message, well...it was pretty obvious. To my mind the sick stick was the most persuasive demonstration on how technological advances in police weaponry can jeopardize the legitimacy and dignity involved in policing.

Overall, I understand that times have changed since the old days and that there are very good reasons for many of the advancement in policing. But my argument is that we can never give a carte-blanche or turn a blind eye to the police use of force. We must always be aware of the development of police tactics, and consider how we want our representatives of law and order to behave in their very difficult duty. Many decisions can make absolute sense when viewed in their immediate circumstance. However, many of these decisions, when viewed in their wider context, can reveal a very dangerous path.

*Edited a tad for readability. I haven't been reading enough this summer, and my grammatical skills are lacking.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2010, 04:50:19 PM by Benocrates »
Quote from: President Barack Obama
Pot had helped
Get the fuck over it.

?

Sentient Fridge

  • Official Member
  • 7787
  • Flat Earth Believer
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #2 on: August 10, 2010, 04:21:56 PM »
In general, I agree. I have already posted in other threads about the problems involved in militarizing the police. By that I mean the excessive tactical gear, leather gloves, weapon belt, soldier-like uniform, etc. Most old cops can remember the days when a cop only had a gun and a baton, and when many cops wouldn't pull their weapon once in their whole career. One thing that police must never forget is that they are citizens just like the people walking the streets, but they have a whole other set of responsibilities in their use of force. I wouldn't go as far as to call them thugs of the government, but there is a slope that police are walking down that might take them into a scary place.

The logic today is slowly developing into the view that a higher level of preemptive force will prevent more violence from happening. And to an extent that logic may be effective. But we can never allow these ideals and tactics to get out of control. One of the greatest problems is force technology that have come onto the scene in the last few years. It seems today that police refuse to take risks in dealing with suspects, which results in shoot first (mostly taser) and ask questions later. We have seen this happen in many cases across the Western world, and arguable it's getting more prevalent. Now of course, not every cop uses these tools unethically. But the argument is the general trend of use has moved closer toward the line of excessive and oppressive. I think the movie minority report was trying to demonstrate this message, well...it was pretty obvious. To me, the sick stick was the most persuasive demonstration on how technological advances in police weaponry can jeopardize the legitimacy and dignity involved in policing.

Overall, I understand that times have changed since the old days and that there are very good reasons for many of the advancement in policing. But my argument is that we can never give a carte-blanche or turn a blind eye to the police use of force. We must always be aware of the development of police tactics, and consider how we want our representatives of law and order to behave in their very difficult duty.

This post needs more commas and less periods, Too many sentences starting with And or But.

I also agree with the post.

you cant see moutains because you have no eyes
DON'T EVER LEAVE, VONGEO, MOTHERFUH-YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

?

EireEngineer

  • 1205
  • Woo Nemesis
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #3 on: August 10, 2010, 04:22:49 PM »
In general, I agree. I have already posted in other threads about the problems involved in militarizing the police. By that I mean the excessive tactical gear, leather gloves, weapon belt, soldier-like uniform, etc. Most old cops can remember the days when a cop only had a gun and a baton, and when many cops wouldn't pull their weapon once in their whole career. One thing that police must never forget is that they are citizens just like the people walking the streets, but they have a whole other set of responsibilities in their use of force. I wouldn't go as far as to call them thugs of the government, but there is a slope that police are walking down that might take them into a scary place.

The logic today is slowly developing into the view that a higher level of preemptive force will prevent more violence from happening. And to an extent that logic may be effective. But we can never allow these ideals and tactics to get out of control. One of the greatest problems is force technology that have come onto the scene in the last few years. It seems today that police refuse to take risks in dealing with suspects, which results in shoot first (mostly taser) and ask questions later. We have seen this happen in many cases across the Western world, and arguable it's getting more prevalent. Now of course, not every cop uses these tools unethically. But the argument is the general trend of use has moved closer toward the line of excessive and oppressive. I think the movie minority report was trying to demonstrate this message, well...it was pretty obvious. To me, the sick stick was the most persuasive demonstration on how technological advances in police weaponry can jeopardize the legitimacy and dignity involved in policing.

Overall, I understand that times have changed since the old days and that there are very good reasons for many of the advancement in policing. But my argument is that we can never give a carte-blanche or turn a blind eye to the police use of force. We must always be aware of the development of police tactics, and consider how we want our representatives of law and order to behave in their very difficult duty.
Please review the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy and get back to us.
If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the precipitate.

*

Benocrates

  • 3077
  • Canadian Philosopher
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #4 on: August 10, 2010, 04:33:49 PM »
plz elaborate your critique.
Quote from: President Barack Obama
Pot had helped
Get the fuck over it.

*

Benocrates

  • 3077
  • Canadian Philosopher
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #5 on: August 10, 2010, 04:34:29 PM »
In general, I agree. I have already posted in other threads about the problems involved in militarizing the police. By that I mean the excessive tactical gear, leather gloves, weapon belt, soldier-like uniform, etc. Most old cops can remember the days when a cop only had a gun and a baton, and when many cops wouldn't pull their weapon once in their whole career. One thing that police must never forget is that they are citizens just like the people walking the streets, but they have a whole other set of responsibilities in their use of force. I wouldn't go as far as to call them thugs of the government, but there is a slope that police are walking down that might take them into a scary place.

The logic today is slowly developing into the view that a higher level of preemptive force will prevent more violence from happening. And to an extent that logic may be effective. But we can never allow these ideals and tactics to get out of control. One of the greatest problems is force technology that have come onto the scene in the last few years. It seems today that police refuse to take risks in dealing with suspects, which results in shoot first (mostly taser) and ask questions later. We have seen this happen in many cases across the Western world, and arguable it's getting more prevalent. Now of course, not every cop uses these tools unethically. But the argument is the general trend of use has moved closer toward the line of excessive and oppressive. I think the movie minority report was trying to demonstrate this message, well...it was pretty obvious. To me, the sick stick was the most persuasive demonstration on how technological advances in police weaponry can jeopardize the legitimacy and dignity involved in policing.

Overall, I understand that times have changed since the old days and that there are very good reasons for many of the advancement in policing. But my argument is that we can never give a carte-blanche or turn a blind eye to the police use of force. We must always be aware of the development of police tactics, and consider how we want our representatives of law and order to behave in their very difficult duty.

This post needs more commas and less periods, Too many sentences starting with And or But.

I also agree with the post.

Will edit, standby.
Quote from: President Barack Obama
Pot had helped
Get the fuck over it.

?

EireEngineer

  • 1205
  • Woo Nemesis
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #6 on: August 10, 2010, 04:39:27 PM »
Cops have had to become far more aggressive because the people they end up arresting are far more ignorant, aggressive, and difficult then they used to be, not to mention more heavily armed.
If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the precipitate.

*

Benocrates

  • 3077
  • Canadian Philosopher
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #7 on: August 10, 2010, 04:51:34 PM »
If you read my post, I have provided for those decisions making sense to a degree. But it is the wider consequence that I am concerned with. I've edited my post, and it might be more clear to you.
Quote from: President Barack Obama
Pot had helped
Get the fuck over it.

*

Benocrates

  • 3077
  • Canadian Philosopher
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #8 on: August 10, 2010, 04:58:13 PM »
Also, I don't quite understand where the post hoc fallacy is.
Quote from: President Barack Obama
Pot had helped
Get the fuck over it.

Re: My views on cops
« Reply #9 on: August 10, 2010, 06:02:32 PM »
What we used to have was called 'community policing' where police officers served the community in many ways, for example people were never afraid to ask a cop for directions or even help with some tasks(assisting senior citizens and such).

Today what we have is called paramilitary policing, and it's mainly a result of the drug war, though the war of terror has also added to it significantly in the last decade or so. Today few people are comfortable asking a cop for help with anything, many people are afraid of and intimidated by the police even if they do nothing illegal.

A little background and some figures/stats/casualty lists:


Quote
Botched Paramilitary Police Raids:
An Epidemic of "Isolated Incidents"

"If a widespread pattern of [knock-and-announce] violations were shown . . . there would be reason for grave concern."
—Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, in Hudson v. Michigan, June 15, 2006.

An interactive map of botched SWAT and paramilitary police raids, released in conjunction with the Cato policy paper "Overkill: The Rise of Paramilitary Police Raids," by Radley Balko.

http://www.cato.org/raidmap/

The paper itself must be paid for to be viewed in whole, but here's the link and the abstract:

Quote
Executive Summary
Americans have long maintained that a man’s home is his castle and that he has the right to defend it from unlawful intruders. Unfortunately, that right may be disappearing. Over the last 25 years, America has seen a disturbing militarization of its civilian law enforcement, along with a dramatic and unsettling rise in the use of paramilitary police units (most commonly called Special Weapons and Tactics, or SWAT) for routine police work. The most common use of SWAT teams today is to serve narcotics warrants, usually with forced, unannounced entry into the home.

These increasingly frequent raids, 40,000 per year by one estimate, are needlessly subjecting nonviolent drug offenders, bystanders, and wrongly targeted civilians to the terror of having their homes invaded while they’re sleeping, usually by teams of heavily armed paramilitary units dressed not as police officers but as soldiers. These raids bring unnecessary violence and provocation to nonviolent drug offenders, many of whom were guilty of only misdemeanors. The raids terrorize innocents when police mistakenly target the wrong residence. And they have resulted in dozens of needless deaths and injuries, not only of drug offenders, but also of police officers, children, bystanders, and innocent suspects.

This paper presents a history and overview of the issue of paramilitary drug raids, provides an extensive catalogue of abuses and mistaken raids, and offers recommendations for reform.

http://store.cato.org/index.asp?fa=ProductDetails&method=cats&scid=15&pid=1441318

Although I admit to not usually being a huge fan of the Cato Institute on this issue I am in agreement almost 100%. There are a few issues I have with some of the proposals to solve the problems, but as far as the actual problem goes and how bad it is I am in agreement.


*

Benocrates

  • 3077
  • Canadian Philosopher
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #10 on: August 10, 2010, 09:16:28 PM »
Excellent links. That interactive map is incredible, and demonstrates this trend in an anecdotal manner. I'm sure there is much more statistical evidence in that essay, though I'm not necessarily going to pay for it. I agree that the CATO institute is not necessarily my favourite think-tank, but the evidence presented appears rather objective.

I know there will be responses, similar to what has already been alluded to, that the police need to adopt these tactics to combat the rising violence of offenders. However, as I have argued, there can often be a vast disparity between instrumental reasoning and broad, social and political analysis. Another argument that has been presented by SINABS is that, in general, the so-called 'war on drugs' and 'war on terror' have strongly influenced the militarization of civilian police. The CATO interactive map is quite persuasive on this point.
Quote from: President Barack Obama
Pot had helped
Get the fuck over it.

*

Saddam Hussein

  • Official Member
  • 35370
  • Former President of Iraq
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #11 on: August 11, 2010, 12:49:07 PM »
I'm not so sure if I agree with the idea of civilian review boards.  I understand that there is often a "wall of silence" with the police, and opportunities for lying and corruption if they investigate everything internally, but I don't know if I'm really comfortable with a bunch of laymen deciding what's reasonable for police to do.  Doctors aren't reviewed by boards of people with no medical training or expertise.  Military officers don't explain their strategies to random shmucks off the street.  Why should an arbitrary group of people with absolutely no professional experience or training suddenly have the right to decide what is or is not reasonable for the police to do?

*

Benocrates

  • 3077
  • Canadian Philosopher
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #12 on: August 11, 2010, 01:01:59 PM »
Well, doesn't that happen already in jury trials? The qualifier of reasonableness doesn't often require a large background in the field and training. I'm sure it sometimes does, but most often, probably not. I also don't think civilian boards would be laymen, but likely composed of many different people from varied backgrounds and with varied expertise. Likely the head of the board would be a judge, and the members are representatives of various community organizations.
Quote from: President Barack Obama
Pot had helped
Get the fuck over it.

*

Saddam Hussein

  • Official Member
  • 35370
  • Former President of Iraq
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #13 on: August 11, 2010, 01:43:15 PM »
Well, doesn't that happen already in jury trials?

It does, yes, but relatively few complaints regarding police make it to trial.  Unlike many people, I see this not as evidence that police are corrupt, but that most complaints are frivolous or unfounded.  What happens usually, I believe, is that if whatever reviewing agency agrees that the officer broke the law, they pass it on to a grand jury.

Quote
I also don't think civilian boards would be laymen, but likely composed of many different people from varied backgrounds and with varied expertise. Likely the head of the board would be a judge, and the members are representatives of various community organizations.

By "laymen", I don't mean idiots, but people who are simply unqualified in the concerned field; in this case, policing.

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #14 on: August 11, 2010, 06:33:47 PM »
But policing is not done for its own sake. It's done in order to produce certain outcomes for society. A policeman is (at best) an expert at catching criminals or finding enough evidence to prosecute them. However, there is no point in catching criminals if you do so in a manner that results in a 'net loss' for society. That is where civilian review comes in.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

Re: My views on cops
« Reply #15 on: August 11, 2010, 07:00:19 PM »
In a democratic society in which the people define the laws(directly or indirectly) the police, judicial system entirely, military and government at all levels should be subject to civilian oversight to ensure that they are operating within the very laws they are upholding and doing so in manners that do not defy the constitution or bill of rights and such established to ensure that the people have power over their government and not the opposite.

Unfortunately in America what you have today is not a real democracy but a pseudo-democracy built out of propaganda covering for a fascistic oligarchical state built on parasitic consumerism and 'profit before people'.

Because there is constant political BS flooding the airways like the ultimate 'reality TV' show people think that the government is actually subject to their control and "held in check", even when they know that is certainly not the case as the CIA or NSA taps their phones and reads their emails in the name of national security and as illegal wars are fought under false pretexts by American young people in the name of democracy and freedom(actually profiteering) and as American citizens are detained indefinitely without trial in direct contradiction to their defined rights as U.S citizens.

And of course we have the war waged on American citizens by the American government for going on 40 years now, the 'War on Drugs' - aka the 'War Primarily on Drug Users And Small Time Dealers'(mostly Americans). I read a while back some town in Texas(I think) purchased a million dollar APC for anti-drug operations AFTER having successfully reduced drug rates dramatically to almost non-existent (known) levels in that town. Military hardware not to clean up the streets but to intimidate people in the name of keeping the streets clean.

The founding fathers of America warned against allowing anyone to take away citizen's rights in the name of freedom, security, democracy or anything else and the American people have been brainwashed over the last century to spit in the face of their founding fathers and hand their nation over to foreign interests that do not have the American people's best interests at heart.

The increasing militarization of the civilian police forces in America is just another way to ensure their control over the people.

But I'm just a paranoid conspiracy nut, there is absolutely no evidence of this whatsoever... [/sarcasm]

And yes, I have heard the 'but what can we do about it' line many times. The answer is 'fight for your rights' - the people always have the ultimate power but as long as they refuse to use it and allow themselves to be controlled/manipulated them having that power is pointless.

Edit: Note also that the militarization of the police force is resented by many people and contributes to increased criminal activity as the police and the law in general become viewed more and more as ways to control the people and not protect them.
« Last Edit: August 11, 2010, 07:13:29 PM by SINABS »

?

clovis2

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 42
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #16 on: August 11, 2010, 07:20:16 PM »
I agree with johnson17.

Re: My views on cops
« Reply #17 on: August 11, 2010, 07:51:44 PM »
To sum up my views on cops in America and Canada and many so called 'advanced' societies today:

The police forces in America and Canada were established as community policing forces - the police were there to protect people from dangerous criminals and generally assist in maintaining the peace and sense of established community in many non-enforcement ways.

Today we have paramilitary policing where heavily militarized police forces are used to enforce laws against American citizens that in many cases are in no way protecting them from dangerous criminal activity but dictating that an individual choosing to consume a drug that in 99% of cases only harms the user him or herself is a criminal offense that qualifies for getting your door busted down by heavily armed SWAT teams dressed like soldiers packing military hardware and having the right to kill to defend themselves against anyone who's home they enter in this manner that attempts to defend themselves from the heavily armed intruders.

The invention of the 'no-knock' raid was the end of any real semblance of democratic order in America and the official acceptance of a police state.

On a funny note I once had a guy I was debating with admit that on most no-knock raids which typically occur late at night so as to catch people sleeping/off guard and offer the cover of darkness for carrying out the raid the police do not adequately announce/identify themselves in ways that the 'subjects' in the target home could understand them, if they identify themselves at all.(Typically they announce 'police' right before crashing the door, when people are still asleep - many people are shockingly hard at hearing when asleep...)

But despite this admission on his part he then claimed that because they had 'SWAT' or 'POLICE' on the back of their gear they were adequately identified.

Funny, I doubt any SWAT commando or police officer period is going to have their backs turned to the 'subjects' when raiding a home in heavily armed fashion... but I suppose they are supposed to be able to magically see through the cops to notice the ID.

If heavily armed intruders that I have no idea are cops bust into my home while I'm sleeping and in my groggy state of mind caused by being shocked out of sleep I perceive those unidentified intruders as a threat to my family or myself I will most definitely defend myself. And likely be killed in the 'self defense' of the cops or end up in prison for a long time for defending myself against those perceived threats.

Even if it turns out they just had the wrong address and I was not guilty of any prior criminal behavior.  


PS - I don't deny that many cops are pretty decent people and are not purposefully trying to oppress society but it's the fact they have been militarized to the point of accepting the 'it's my duty to uphold these laws even if I don't agree with them' propaganda.

Here in Canada most of our laws are written in ways that allow officers to have much leeway in making arrests and deciding what is and is not criminal behavior('an officer MAY arrest someone for this activity...' and such), but the militarized 'our duty' spiel has taken over and most cops do not exercise the rights they are granted to think for themselves when determining whether something deemed 'criminal' by law is actually worth prosecuting for in that particular case.

Well around here most of the cops are pretty good and there is a great deal of lenience provided for 'soft' drugs and other issues that are directed at protecting people from themselves than protecting them from criminals. But in the cities it's usually not the same.

Edit: I guess that's not much of a summary after all... lol.
 
« Last Edit: August 11, 2010, 07:54:58 PM by SINABS »

*

Chris Spaghetti

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 12682
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #18 on: August 12, 2010, 12:55:04 AM »
In related news, I saw the cops conducting a raid on my way to work today with their steel battering-ram

*

frostee

  • Official Member
  • 3555
  • Posts: 1337
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #19 on: August 12, 2010, 01:27:20 AM »
In related news, I saw the cops conducting a raid on my way to work today with their steel battering-ram
Was it the Cyber Police? Sounds like they back traced someone...
Recently religious due to the impending rapture.

*

Saddam Hussein

  • Official Member
  • 35370
  • Former President of Iraq
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #20 on: August 12, 2010, 06:36:55 AM »
But policing is not done for its own sake. It's done in order to produce certain outcomes for society. A policeman is (at best) an expert at catching criminals or finding enough evidence to prosecute them. However, there is no point in catching criminals if you do so in a manner that results in a 'net loss' for society. That is where civilian review comes in.

But a police officer's expertise in catching criminals should also extend to what level of force is usually reasonable, and the laws governing them.  I don't mean to sound condescending or arrogant, but people can be stupid.  There are a good portion of people today who will bleat "BRUTALITY!  BRUTALITY!  BRUTALITY!" at any sign of police force, no matter how reasonable.

*

Benocrates

  • 3077
  • Canadian Philosopher
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #21 on: August 12, 2010, 07:37:33 AM »
That's why a civilian review board would not be populated by idiots. Public opinion is not a civilian review, it is public opinion. This is the whole point about my original post in that, when viewed in the narrow field of police action, some decisions may appear to be rational. However, when viewed from an independent position, with rational people, some of those decisions are clearly inappropriate and unreasonable.
Quote from: President Barack Obama
Pot had helped
Get the fuck over it.

*

Saddam Hussein

  • Official Member
  • 35370
  • Former President of Iraq
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #22 on: August 12, 2010, 08:44:51 AM »
That's why a civilian review board would not be populated by idiots. Public opinion is not a civilian review, it is public opinion.

The problem isn't necessarily that they would be idiots, but that they would be unqualified in the field of policing, telling professionals how to do their job.  Also, I believe that in some communities, these boards are elected.

Quote
This is the whole point about my original post in that, when viewed in the narrow field of police action, some decisions may appear to be rational. However, when viewed from an independent position, with rational people, some of those decisions are clearly inappropriate and unreasonable.

I'm sorry, but I don't follow here.  What could an unqualified and inexperienced civilian with no background in policing possibly have to say on the subject that a professional lawman could not?  If a review board approves the actions of an officer that was "clearly inappropriate and unreasonable", then that review board is corrupt and not doing their job right.  The problem isn't with the system of review boards, it's with that review board in particular.

*

Benocrates

  • 3077
  • Canadian Philosopher
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #23 on: August 12, 2010, 08:54:40 AM »
My argument is that review boards are tasked with assessing ethical and moral claims, not about telling police how to do their job. It's a reflective assessment that decides if certain actions were reasonable in their social context and in the broader conditions of what police are expected to do. It is the same concept as a court of law. Courts are not going to necessarily be intimately familiar with many of the cases it tries, but the process is set up so that judgments can be made by judges and juries concerning the ethics and reasonableness of certain actions.

Quote from: President Barack Obama
Pot had helped
Get the fuck over it.

Re: My views on cops
« Reply #24 on: August 12, 2010, 12:20:54 PM »
Why should we trust cops to investigate themselves? Its not in their interests to charge one of their own men. And cops arent 'professionals', they're just guys with guns and badges. You don't need a college degree to know that what a cop is doing is brutality.

Re: My views on cops
« Reply #25 on: August 12, 2010, 01:12:13 PM »
Honestly, I'm not a troll. I didn't mean to come off so strong in that other thread. I'm interested in having civil discussions, so I made a thread about my views.

From what I've seen, cops are legalized thugs of the government. I'm not saying that we should get rid of cops, i know that society would fall apart without them or whatever, but power always corrupts them, even idealistic ones. I wish cops were less intrusive, less pushy, and more reasonable. I see cops using tasers on people who have done nothing but mouth off. there is no excuse for cops arresting someone and wasting time just for selling pot. And I don't like the militarization of police. Why do they call us civilians and strap on weapons every day like they're looking for a fight? Face it, they are. Cops need boards of ordinary people, not fellow cops, to review shootings and citizen complaints. They need more oversight and training.

In a little late, forgive me.

I disagree with you from the first sentence. Cops are not "legalized thugs of the government". Granted, there are a number of assholes who were bullies in school, loved the power they had over people, realized they couldn't actually produce anything worthwhile in the private sector and thus became cops. However, I honestly believe that those are in the minority. My belief comes from first-hand experience. I have a family member who is a retired cop (which probably creates a bias), and I've been helped many times by cops. This help doesn't come from my family association, as the only cop in the family lives over 2000 miles from me and I refuse to display PBA window stickers or wallet cards.

Exhibit A-

Well before I got married, I used to meet a friend at a local billiards club. One night, my car broke down on the way home. A State Trooper stopped by within 10 minutes and hung around while I tried to get my ride started. After we both realized it was futile, I asked if he could drop me off at the hotel down the street so I could use the phone. Before entering the car, he asked for my drivers licence. Instead of driving me to the hotel, he took me 8 miles out of his patrol route and drove me to my parents house. Embarrassed, he asked me how to get back to the highway.

Exhibit B-

My brother was applying to a film school and part of that application involved submitting a film project. The project my brother came up with wasn't the best script in the world but involved a lot of camera work with many complicated scenes and cuts. So while a bunch of the neighborhood idiots were in my parents front yard armed with cap-guns and swords, a cop stopped by and asked what we were doing. After we explained, he laughed and offered us the use of his spotlight. We accepted, returned it two days later, and the cop was invited (and attended) the end of the year film festival.

Exhibit C-

At an old job, I met a guy who I really got along with. A lot of similar interests, sense of humor, etc. He told me he was getting into satellite television repair and asked if I'd be interested in helping him start a company. I was, so I headed over to his place after work to get some hands-on experience. Turned out he wasn't repairing systems, he was modifying set-top-boxes to receive signals without paying for them. He was also smoking pot heavily. I've never done a drug in my life and never intentionally committed a crime, so I left. Smelling like pot. Took about 20 minutes until I got pulled over. I was pulled over for a burned out brake light, but I KNOW the officer smelled the pot. He asked if I had been drinking, and I told him the truth. I had been. Then he asked about the pot smell. I told him the truth. He asked me how much further I had to go until I was home. I told him the truth. It was only about 2 miles. He followed me home, shook my hand, wished me a good night.

Exhibit D -

This one was just a few weeks ago. I was driving my wife's car, not realizing that she had forgotten about updating the registration. I was pulled over about 3 miles from my house. The officer took my info, ran it through the computer, came back and told me that he had only pulled me over for a brake light but found that the registration had expired. He also said that it was an honest mistake, but also offered to follow me home to ensure my safety.

That's the extent of my experience with police officers. Every single one of them has gone above and beyond what they were required to do and extended help without my asking for it. I treat them with respect. I'm honest with them. I do what they ask of me. I'm polite. Every time I've been pulled over, I turn on the hazard lights, shut the engine off, roll down all the windows. When stopped outside of a car, I keep my hands visible. I speak calmly. I'm polite.

Lesson to the burned - Be polite. Do what you're asked. Answer honestly.

Long post and I'm sorry for it. Just my 2 cents.







 

*

theonlydann

  • Official Member
  • 24172
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #26 on: August 12, 2010, 01:14:26 PM »
Better answer to the burned.

Say nothing and get a lawyer.

Re: My views on cops
« Reply #27 on: August 12, 2010, 01:33:38 PM »
Better answer to the burned.

Say nothing and get a lawyer.

Even better answer to the burned.

If you did nothing wrong, or at least not intentionally, you won't need a lawyer. Problems start when you start being a smart-ass.

If you already failed to do all the above, yes, get a lawyer. And don't do it again.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2010, 01:38:51 PM by Ranger 3 »

*

Benocrates

  • 3077
  • Canadian Philosopher
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #28 on: August 12, 2010, 01:48:30 PM »
Honestly, I'm not a troll. I didn't mean to come off so strong in that other thread. I'm interested in having civil discussions, so I made a thread about my views.

From what I've seen, cops are legalized thugs of the government. I'm not saying that we should get rid of cops, i know that society would fall apart without them or whatever, but power always corrupts them, even idealistic ones. I wish cops were less intrusive, less pushy, and more reasonable. I see cops using tasers on people who have done nothing but mouth off. there is no excuse for cops arresting someone and wasting time just for selling pot. And I don't like the militarization of police. Why do they call us civilians and strap on weapons every day like they're looking for a fight? Face it, they are. Cops need boards of ordinary people, not fellow cops, to review shootings and citizen complaints. They need more oversight and training.

In a little late, forgive me.

I disagree with you from the first sentence. Cops are not "legalized thugs of the government". Granted, there are a number of assholes who were bullies in school, loved the power they had over people, realized they couldn't actually produce anything worthwhile in the private sector and thus became cops. However, I honestly believe that those are in the minority. My belief comes from first-hand experience...

In other words, you read the first sentence and went on a rant about how nice the cops you've met are. If you read the thread you would understand that the arguments made are directed toward the overall militarization of police tactics based, in part, upon the advancement of weapons technology, and the ridiculous 'wars' on terror and drugs. It is obvious that the majority of cops execute their duties ethically and, in general, are very responsible and considerate individuals. The arguments are far more subtle and address a far more difficult subject. I would suggest you re-read this thread and come up with a post that contributes to the theme and topic.
Quote from: President Barack Obama
Pot had helped
Get the fuck over it.

*

Saddam Hussein

  • Official Member
  • 35370
  • Former President of Iraq
Re: My views on cops
« Reply #29 on: August 12, 2010, 02:46:07 PM »
Honestly, I'm not a troll. I didn't mean to come off so strong in that other thread. I'm interested in having civil discussions, so I made a thread about my views.

From what I've seen, cops are legalized thugs of the government. I'm not saying that we should get rid of cops, i know that society would fall apart without them or whatever, but power always corrupts them, even idealistic ones. I wish cops were less intrusive, less pushy, and more reasonable. I see cops using tasers on people who have done nothing but mouth off. there is no excuse for cops arresting someone and wasting time just for selling pot. And I don't like the militarization of police. Why do they call us civilians and strap on weapons every day like they're looking for a fight? Face it, they are. Cops need boards of ordinary people, not fellow cops, to review shootings and citizen complaints. They need more oversight and training.

In a little late, forgive me.

I disagree with you from the first sentence. Cops are not "legalized thugs of the government". Granted, there are a number of assholes who were bullies in school, loved the power they had over people, realized they couldn't actually produce anything worthwhile in the private sector and thus became cops. However, I honestly believe that those are in the minority. My belief comes from first-hand experience...

In other words, you read the first sentence and went on a rant about how nice the cops you've met are. If you read the thread you would understand that the arguments made are directed toward the overall militarization of police tactics based, in part, upon the advancement of weapons technology, and the ridiculous 'wars' on terror and drugs. It is obvious that the majority of cops execute their duties ethically and, in general, are very responsible and considerate individuals. The arguments are far more subtle and address a far more difficult subject. I would suggest you re-read this thread and come up with a post that contributes to the theme and topic.

Well, those are the arguments you made.  The OP just ranted about personal experience with bad cops, and Ranger 3 replied with personal experience of good cops.