Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 27

Thread: Cops do NOT prevent crime

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Yakima, wa
    Posts
    31

    Cops do NOT prevent crime

    Think about it.

    They drive around, in their cars and RESPOND to crimes that have ALREADY been committed, or are currently in the process of being committed.

    Or write traffic citations.

    Rarely, they happen upon a crime in the act. But that is rare.

    This post is in response to a conversation I had with a friend.

    To most of us here, this is obvious. But it's one of those general misconceptions that many people have. But then, when they actually consider it, it hits them like a brick... Like an "OH.....!" Moment.

    This has been a Thunderbolt Public Service Announcement.

    Now back to your regularly scheduled program.



    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

  2. #2
    Regular Member JohnMoses's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    America
    Posts
    112
    When seconds count, the police are just minutes away.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Baked on Grease's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sterling, Va.
    Posts
    652
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_...ct_of_Columbia

    When the subject comes up to non believers I point them to this case.

    Sent from my SCH-I800 using Tapatalk 2

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    these girls should have been armed ... its too bad what happened to them ... foolish living in a place where you cannot own a gun.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Phoenix David's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Glendale, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    629
    It would have been a crime for them to be armed.

    But I am sure once they arrived the took good reports and lots of photographs.
    Freedom is a bit like sex, when your getting it you take it for granted, when you're not you want it bad, other people get mad at you for having it and others want to take it away from you so only they have it.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Tennessee, ,
    Posts
    695
    Quote Originally Posted by Baked on Grease View Post

    When the subject comes up to non believers I point them to this case.

    Sent from my SCH-I800 using Tapatalk 2
    +1

    There is another case I remember about a woman with a restraining order that ended up making it to SCOTUS as well.

    I try to remind people that the "To Protect and Serve" on the side of patrol cars is an advertising slogan similar to the McDonalds "I'm lovin' it.".

    Both serve to project a corporate image, neither should be taken at face value.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Fuller Malarkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Cadre
    Posts
    1,077
    Quote Originally Posted by unreconstructed1 View Post
    +1

    There is another case I remember about a woman with a restraining order that ended up making it to SCOTUS as well.

    I try to remind people that the "To Protect and Serve" on the side of patrol cars is an advertising slogan similar to the McDonalds "I'm lovin' it.".

    Both serve to project a corporate image, neither should be taken at face value.
    I quoted this just because it needs repeating.
    Liberty is so strongly a part of human nature that it can be treated as a no-lose argument position.
    ~Citizen

    From the cop’s perspective, the expression “law-abiding citizen” is a functional synonym for “Properly obedient slave".

    "People are not born being "anti-cop" and believing we live in a police state. That is a result of experience."

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Yakima, wa
    Posts
    31
    I neglected to point out in my first post that I do not dislike cops. I respect the job that they do. Many times, they are 'handcuffed' (pun intended) to what they can actually do. And rightly so, in most cases, where citizens rights are concerned.

    But I just wanted say that I am not a cop hater. I believed that most of them are just trying to do their job and honestly believe that they are doing the best they can.

    Even if they are misinformed sometimes.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

  9. #9
    Regular Member 09jisaac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Louisa, Kentucky
    Posts
    1,694
    Quote Originally Posted by thunderbolt View Post
    I neglected to point out in my first post that I do not dislike cops. I respect the job that they do. Many times, they are 'handcuffed' (pun intended) to what they can actually do. And rightly so, in most cases, where citizens rights are concerned.

    But I just wanted say that I am not a cop hater. I believed that most of them are just trying to do their job and honestly believe that they are doing the best they can.

    Even if they are misinformed sometimes.
    We get people like you all the time. It is nothing new. The reason nobody said anything to "correct you" is because most of us, including I, are exactly the same.

    Most of us have full respect for the government and their employees, but we realize that government in its very nature is detrimental to liberty. We need a government just big enough to enforce laws (with a victim) and anything beyond that is taking liberties.

    Most of the times it is actually illegal for cops to prevent a crime. In the state of Kentucky I can legally carry an AR-15 around with me during my daily activities (as long as I am not mailing a letter or getting my drivers license renewed). If a cop takes that firearm away from me, he is actually breaking a law. So it is not a surprise that they cannot prevent me form shooting up a crowded mall.

    Even if you have a LEA that ONLY wants to protect peoples rights and enforce laws, they cannot be super human. They will always be behind the curve.
    No man alive can beat me in a fair fight: It's not fair to chase a man down and beat him.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Deanimator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Rocky River, OH, U.S.A.
    Posts
    2,086
    Quote Originally Posted by unreconstructed1 View Post
    +1

    There is another case I remember about a woman with a restraining order that ended up making it to SCOTUS as well.

    I try to remind people that the "To Protect and Serve" on the side of patrol cars is an advertising slogan similar to the McDonalds "I'm lovin' it.".

    Both serve to project a corporate image, neither should be taken at face value.
    I've had imbeciles get angry and declare that "To Protect and Serve" on the patrol car doors proves that they HAVE to "protect" you.

    I always respond, "If it said 'Have a nice day!', could you sue them if you didn't?"
    --- Gun control: The theory that 110lb. women have the "right" to fistfight with 210lb. rapists.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Deanimator View Post
    I've had imbeciles get angry and declare that "To Protect and Serve" on the patrol car doors proves that they HAVE to "protect" you.

    I always respond, "If it said 'Have a nice day!', could you sue them if you didn't?"
    But they do "serve and protect" .. just not you ...

    They are not imbeciles, just brainwashed into thinking the guberment has the ability to protect them...

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    northern wis
    Posts
    3,202
    Quote Originally Posted by thunderbolt View Post
    Think about it.

    They drive around, in their cars and RESPOND to crimes that have ALREADY been committed, or are currently in the process of being committed.

    Or write traffic citations.

    Rarely, they happen upon a crime in the act. But that is rare.

    This post is in response to a conversation I had with a friend.

    To most of us here, this is obvious. But it's one of those general misconceptions that many people have. But then, when they actually consider it, it hits them like a brick... Like an "OH.....!" Moment.

    This has been a Thunderbolt Public Service Announcement.

    Now back to your regularly scheduled program.



    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
    Crime prevention is a hard thing to prove one can hardly ever know if or when a crime is prevented by some one who see the LEO drive or walk by.

    Do you slow down when you see a patrol car, does a robber not rob because there is a officer near by we could go on and on.

    So how does one prove a negative.


    Cops are never around when you need them and are around when you don't, like the last time you recived a speeding citation.

    We all want the LEO around when we need them like when your up side down in your car after an crash and they are there helping save your life. But then maybe they prevented the crash by stopping the other guy for speeding before he hit you thus there was no crash. You well never know that nor the officer or the person stopped.

    Lots of times as a LEO its dammed if you do and dammed if you don't If you don't enforce the traffic laws and crashes and people getting hurt and killed goes up every body says your lazy and not doing your job.

    You start enforceing the taffic laws your a hard ass and the people getting the citations are pissed off.

    Its all ways nice to have them there when we need them but when they do something we don't like we don't want them around.

    I am the frist to aggree that we have way too many laws and regulations and we should thin the herd so to speak.

    The question is how , when and what. because some where, some one thought it was a very good idea at some time.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Tennessee, ,
    Posts
    695
    Quote Originally Posted by Firearms Iinstuctor View Post

    Lots of times as a LEO its dammed if you do and dammed if you don't If you don't enforce the traffic laws and crashes and people getting hurt and killed goes up every body says your lazy and not doing your job.

    You start enforceing the taffic laws your a hard ass and the people getting the citations are pissed off.

    Its all ways nice to have them there when we need them but when they do something we don't like we don't want them around.

    I am the frist to aggree that we have way too many laws and regulations and we should thin the herd so to speak.

    The question is how , when and what. because some where, some one thought it was a very good idea at some time.
    actually, I beg to differ. I don't have a problem with an officer doing his job, even if that job is citing me for speeding.Once or twice an officer has even declined to ticket me for speeding because I was absolutely honest when asked if "I knew how fast I was going."

    The problem I have is the officer who insists on searching me, or my property, when there is no reason. Just because you caught me speeding doesn't give you a reason to search my car. The tattoos on my body don't give you a reason either. I have watched LEOs "cause" a drug dog to "hit" on my car, with full knowledge that I have nothing, and haven't ever had anything in my car, and I've read the reports on the inefficiency of using drug dogs in the first place. My problem isn't with officers trying to do their job, my problem is with those who believe that their badge gives them authority to do whatever, whenever they want. If you would like to know the kind of officers I'm talking about, I can post many, many cites on the type.

    I could debate this topic at length, but I will digress, since I wouldn't want to derail this topic any farther than I probably already have.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    northern wis
    Posts
    3,202
    Yes it is a debate that has been going on for decades.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S.E. Michigan
    Posts
    14
    LE does not prevent crime, I would agree.

    However, their presence is appreciated in some situations.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Yakima, wa
    Posts
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by bagz013 View Post
    LE does not prevent crime, I would agree.

    However, their presence is appreciated in some situations.
    Yes...Maybe.

    Personally, I would much rather have a couple well-known and trusted neighbors that I can train with and they become a known quantity.

    Then, I would simply call them, or they can call me as well, then we could solve the situation, THEN call the cops to come pick up the pieces.

    Rather than have a total stranger tell me to stay in my driveway while he "clears" my house.

    Pipe dream? Yeah, probably.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

  17. #17
    Regular Member carolina guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Concord, NC
    Posts
    1,790
    I think that the term "law enforcement" is a misnomer for the job that police officers perform...they are more properly labeled as "order maintenance".
    If something is wrong for ONE person to do to another, it is still wrong if a BILLION people do it.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Fuller Malarkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Cadre
    Posts
    1,077
    Quote Originally Posted by bagz013 View Post
    LE does not prevent crime, I would agree.

    However, their presence is appreciated in some situations.
    I agree. Directing traffic, finding the lost tot. Accident reports. Anything else is taken as an invitation to dominate.
    Liberty is so strongly a part of human nature that it can be treated as a no-lose argument position.
    ~Citizen

    From the cop’s perspective, the expression “law-abiding citizen” is a functional synonym for “Properly obedient slave".

    "People are not born being "anti-cop" and believing we live in a police state. That is a result of experience."

  19. #19
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by carolina guy View Post
    I think that the term "law enforcement" is a misnomer for the job that police officers perform...they are more properly labeled as "order maintenance".
    I don't "force" is in the word and they take it literally shredding our common law heritage, of no victim no crime.

    Interesting to look at the history of police force, some look at the first police force in Ireland as an Occupiers force meant to keep the public in line.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  20. #20
    Regular Member Skip D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    St. Marys, Ga
    Posts
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by unreconstructed1 View Post
    +1

    There is another case I remember about a woman with a restraining order that ended up making it to SCOTUS as well.

    I try to remind people that the "To Protect and Serve" on the side of patrol cars is an advertising slogan similar to the McDonalds "I'm lovin' it.".

    Both serve to project a corporate image, neither should be taken at face value.
    After reading this,,, I agree
    Shoot straight, stay safe.. Skip D
    Baretta U22, Walther P22, Taurus PT738, Taurus PT709, Ruger LCR 38, Taurus M82 4", S&W SD40

  21. #21
    Regular Member Deanimator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Rocky River, OH, U.S.A.
    Posts
    2,086
    I'm sure that cops PREVENT a certain number of crimes at various times, merely by deterrence. Most criminals avoid active resistance. It turns crime into actual WORK, which they avoid like the plague. If there's a visible cop some place, there probably won't be an overt criminal act in THAT place.

    What cops DON'T do is protect individuals who don't have personal bodyguard details.

    1. Police have no legal duty to protect individuals.
    2. Police have no legal liability when they fail to protect individuals.
    3. Police have virtually no physical ability to protect individuals.


    Police don't protect individuals. They draw chalk outlines around individuals who don't protect themselves.

    If you're not willing and able to protect yourself, you're just not going to get protected AT ALL. Anybody who tells you different is a liar.
    --- Gun control: The theory that 110lb. women have the "right" to fistfight with 210lb. rapists.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Deanimator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Rocky River, OH, U.S.A.
    Posts
    2,086
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    But they do "serve and protect" .. just not you ...

    They are not imbeciles, just brainwashed into thinking the guberment has the ability to protect them...
    No, some of them are imbeciles, in particular the ones who stick with fantasy when you explain reality to them, including citations of Supreme Court cases.

    Some people can be educated.

    Others just have to be ignored.
    --- Gun control: The theory that 110lb. women have the "right" to fistfight with 210lb. rapists.

  23. #23
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    I had a bunch of stuff ripped off on a job across the street and up a little on the same block as the police station. You can see the cop shop from my work place.....they didn't prevent that one.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  24. #24
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    I had a bunch of stuff ripped off on a job across the street and up a little on the same block as the police station. You can see the cop shop from my work place.....they didn't prevent that one.
    Cops may prevent crime by accident.
    But there main job is to draw chalk outlines and reports of what the body looks like.

    Sorry this is a jest. I have nothing good to add I just haven't said anything in a while.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Yakima, wa
    Posts
    31

    Re: Cops do NOT prevent crime

    Lol ..


    Again... I do not dislike cops, in general. Some I do not trust, some I do, and some are good friends.

    Most genuinely believe that they are making a difference. Even if it means blurring the line of citizens' rights. I don't agree, but that's their position, right or wrong.

    But I think that most police officers, deep down, know that they can only be so effective. They can't be everywhere at once.

    I think that also they occasionally, by proxy, may prevent a crime or two, simply by being "at the right place, at the right time". But based, on the # of cops per person in population, the percentage is pretty damn low. Just a guess.

    T.



    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •