Doug Huffman
Banned
imported post
No problem but I did take a start until I read your edit.
No problem but I did take a start until I read your edit.
As I said in my original post, personally, I hope the officers heal fast and well.If they disagree with my rights I'll talk to them about it when the heal up
If they disagree with my rights I'll talk to them about it when the heal up
As I said in my original post, personally, I hope the officers heal fast and well.
But I stand by my statement that its difficult to embrace the job of a police officer when they do not respect our rights.
The nuance is probably not going to come across in textual conversation.
I feelfor the guys who were shot as human beings and I feel for their families, but I can't jump behind the "cops put their lives on the line for their job" cheerleading as a result of the lack of respect that police have for protecting our rights.
Like I said I know a lot of police officers and they all don't allagree withwhat you are hearing from them two. I just don't think you should blanket all police together just like if someonein our group screws up down the road I don't want to be lumped with them. We want the ones on our side to stay on our side because we agree and not chase them off with blanket statments about all of them.
All in all just remember some of them are with you and would love your help if SHTF.
Criminals are opportunists. They generally weigh the odds to determine if a situation is in their favor. The only way to reduce the carry of firearms by them is to make the penalty enhancement for possession of a firearm during a crime so severe that they find the risk too great. Unfortunately the penalty enhancements that are already on the "books" are ineffective because prosecutors too often use them as plea bargain material. The firearm charge is often dropped in order to obtain a conviction and put another star on the prosecutors chart.
How about we forget about these silly enhancers, and prosecute actions.For instance if the penalty for robbery was 5 years in the slammer and the penalty enhancement for possession of a firearm during the crime was 3X, with no plea bargain you better believe many criminals would think twice about using a firearm. My opinion.
Research we studied in criminology classes I took as free electives during my undergrad work indicated the same.I wish I could find the study again but what they found from jailhouse interviews and other other factors is that around 80% of all criminals felt that they would not be caught. The penalties for being caught never entered their mind. Most felt they were too smart to be caught and others were too dumb to even think about it.
You have hit the nail on the head there. It doesn't matter if it is 90 days or 90 years if they don't think they will ever be caught. We need more resources in actually catching criminals than filling out paperwork to prove their rights weren't violated.If we want to talk about REAL deterent, we DON'T need to enhance the penalties per-se, we need to do a better job of CATCHING criminals.
If John-thug grows up seeing his friends commit crimes, and the almost NEVER get caught (or only a small percent do) they will not think its realistic that THEY will get caught.
If howver, John-thug sees that EVERY time a person commits a crime, they get caught, they will believe that THEY will get caught.
The best deterent is not to try to get a criminal to fear a sentence that they don't think they'll ever face (because they won't get caught) the best deterent is to demonstrate that they WILL get caught.
Catch criminals = deterent
Increase penalties that criminals don't believe they'd ever have to face (cause they won't get caught) = worthless
Yeah, i'd really like to embrace the job that police do and embrace the role they are suppose to provide, but that needs to be reciprocal. When they don't embrace our freedom and leverage crimes like this to push for restrictions against law abiding citizens, its hard to cheerlead for them.
I hope the officers heal fast, but do they hope for our rights? I don't think so.
That is whats wrong with this situation.
Until the police stop treating and viewing everyone as a "potential criminal" our rights will continue to be eroded.
And I DO think thats how police view the public. You are either a cop of a "potential criminal". They don't see you or I and think "there's a law abiding citizen" they think "there's a potential criminal"
In today's society I suspect that the only way a LEO is going to stay alive is to view everyone, even their own grandmother, as a potential criminal. Around here I would say that at least 1/3 of the murder victimsare close relatives of the murderer. Very hard to assume anyone is a "law abiding" citizen anymore.Great-grandma dared cop to Tase her, so he did
Woman, 72, refused to sign traffic ticket; an argument, and then a zap