The Vast Majority of LEOs are...?

[Kivuli]

I don't say that all cops are bad.

I say that ANY cop COULD be bad. Not only don't you deny it, you don't even TRY.

It's not my intent to. Why try to deny something that's true? It makes me look like an idiot. I'm not trying to tell you your method of dealing with cops is wrong, I'm just sharing my opinion that it is based in what I believe is a logical fallacy. The level of vitriol you direct towards them seems quite a bit extreme to me.

I have to note that you haven't offered even a SINGLE reason why I should endanger MYSELF by having any but the absolute minimum contact with police.

That would be because: A. It is painfully obvious nothing I say would convince you to do so, but mostly B. There's no reason for me to convince you to do so. I am not condeming you for carte blanche distrusting any cop you see and wanting no contact with them if you can help it. By all means continue. I believe the danger you espouse is being overreacted to, and is overstated based on the relative numbers of such.

An analogy would be that riding as a passenger in a car is incredibly dangerous. You never know what driver is a good driver and what driver might crash at any moment. So why ride in a car at all? You save yourself the risk of anything bad happening because of a bad driver. Not a perfect analogy, but close enough to make my point.

I am sure there were good little boys in Hitler's youth too, so we shouldn't paint the whole group as bad....

That's a bit of a strawman argument. There are police, and even entire departments that do horrible things. Some are caught, some are not. Regardless, you can't believeably tell me that the law enforcement profession as a whole is set up to be what the Schutztaffel were.

The whole system has become a joke, almost any police force will advertise the fact they are "proactive" or trying hard against "crime prevention" both of which are very unconstitutional in my mind. They ignore the constitution, and liberty of people.

It is this that I take issue with. Are there cops (and even departments) that do these things? Yes, absolutely. Does that mean that all, or even most, of them do? No. The ones that do should be taken to task. We have a system for that. Is it perfect? No, but there is a system to change that as well.

The point remains that cops MUST be held to a higher standard as they carry every day the opportunity, method and means to violate innocent citizens' rights--up to and including murdering them. Are all cops guilty of abuses? Of course not, but to deny they have a higher probabililty to do so than you or I is illogical. Read the news; look at the 'bad cop' sites. Yes, some scumbags as eye notes don't look the part. But the vast majority of people cops deal with are not scumbags. For them to err on the opposite end in thinking they are, or using the "could be" philosophy is the problem. If they can't get beyond that, they need a different line of work.

Actually, the vast majority of people cops deal with ARE scumbags. They don't deal with fine, upstanding citizens on a regular basis because fine, upstanding citizens have no reason to talk to, encounter, or deal with the police unless they are in a victim role. It's the crackheads, dealers, drunks, spouse-abusers, mental patients, vagrants, gang-bangers, and general dirtbags that they deal with on a constant basis because those are the people that generate calls.

Emphasis mine. This is a two way street. Erring on the end of thinking every cop is a rights-abusing thug, or using the "could be" philosophy is the problem. If you can't get beyond that... well... that's your right.

 

[Deanimator]

An analogy would be that riding as a passenger in a car is incredibly dangerous. You never know what driver is a good driver and what driver might crash at any moment. So why ride in a car at all? You save yourself the risk of anything bad happening because of a bad driver. Not a perfect analogy, but close enough to make my point.

The difference is that for the most part, I cannot work without an automobile, nor can I reasonably carry out most errands that I must do.

There's literally NO reason for me to have ANY voluntary contact with police for the most part. Remember:

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.

In most instances, protect YOURSELF or don't get protected AT ALL. Anybody who tells you different is a liar.

There's virtually no reason or benefit to me to having VOLUNTARY contact with police, nor any benefit to engaging in any exchanges with them not MANDATED by law in any INVOLUNTARY contact with them.

At MOST, I may have some sort of REPORTING requirement, which is of no POSITIVE tangible benefit to me. At MOST it may eliminate me as a suspect. In all likelihood, it will benefit me no more than a police report regarding a stolen car for insurance purposes. Beyond that, you're on your own.

 

[Kivuli]

I agree with most of your last post (save perhaps for there never being benefit to interacting in a non-mandatory fashion). None of this is proof, or even sound logical basis, to claim that police in general are rights-abusing thugs.

 

[Deanimator]

I agree with most of your last post (save perhaps for there never being benefit to interacting in a non-mandatory fashion). None of this is proof, or even sound logical basis, to claim that police in general are rights-abusing thugs.

Again, it's ABSOLUTE proof with a "sound logical basis" for claiming that ANY strange cop COULD be a rights-abusing thug. Any claim to the contrary is not just irrational, but anti-rational.

That being the case, there's no worthwhile benefit to unnecessarily getting involved with the police or engaging them unnecessarily when you cannot avoid getting involved with them. Any alleged "benefit" would accrue almost exclusively to them, at considerable risk to me. It's like taking random pills out of a bowl at a party. If you don't want to get high off drugs, why do it in the first place? The cops have NOTHING I want. Why risk my finances, liberty and life to get it? No thanks.

 

[okboomer]

...presumed innocent until convicted at trial by a jury of their peers.

:banghead:

What's with the witch-hunt game some of you people are playing?

I don't see anyone bashing cops in this thread nor on a 'witch -hunt' ... specifically what are you referring to?

 

[okboomer]

Yeah, some folks here use every opportunity they can find to bash cops in general based on some actions of some cops. They cannot balance their focus, recognizing that, just as with the regular population, just as with most sub-populations, including this one in which we participate, there are good members and bad members of the LEO population.

The one-sidedness of their outlook really makes the OC movement, of late, take on a bit of a wacko, extremist feel.

Sad.

Again, WHERE, IN THE POSTS PREVIOUS TO THE ONE QUOTED ABOVE HAS ANYONE BASHED A COP OR PARTAKEN IN ANY 'WITCH HUNT' BEHAVIOR?

I see plenty of opinions about general behavior reported in the press, general opinions on drugs, and opinions that those caught dealing drugs need to serve prison time.

Mighty quick to jump on that soap box ... some of the pot calling the kettle black syndrome?

 

[Kivuli]

Again, it's ABSOLUTE proof with a "sound logical basis" for claiming that ANY strange cop COULD be a rights-abusing thug. Any claim to the contrary is not just irrational, but anti-rational.

I think we're not on the same page here; this is not what I'm arguing about. Either that or I'm just not explaining my viewpoint properly. I shall agree to disagree and leave it at that.

 

[rodbender]

I think we're not on the same page here; this is not what I'm arguing about. Either that or I'm just not explaining my viewpoint properly. I shall agree to disagree and leave it at that.

Damn. The back and forth between you two was getting really interesting.

 

[eye95]

You must add that depending upon where you are, your encounter with police is more or less likely to resemble an encounter with the "Black & Tans" from the movie "Michael Collins"...

I must add no such thing. Those are purely your ideas, and I do not wish to be associated with them whatsoever. I find them shallow, bigoted, and wrong.

 

[Deanimator]

I must add no such thing. Those are purely your ideas, and I do not wish to be associated with them whatsoever. I find them shallow, bigoted, and wrong.

Yeah, the New Orleans PD didn't murder anybody after Katrina....

 

[eye95]

Yeah, the New Orleans PD didn't murder anybody after Katrina....

And no one said any such thing.

Is it possible for you to have an honest discussion?

 

[ABNinfantryman]

I'll tell you what is so wrong with being a drug dealer. The main problem is all the lives that are destroyed by drugs, especially young lives. Crack especially. Fries the brain. People high on crack and other drugs have proven to be a very real threat to the rest of us. Young people whose potential in terms of doing something beneficial for themselves and the rest of society, gone forever. Drug rehabilitation is expensive and doesn't always work because a lot of these drugs are addictive. Walk down the back alleys of any fairly large city and you will see plenty of reasons. Throwaway people. Drug dealers make their living off of other peoples' addictions and misery, as well as contribute to it. IIRC, they don't have a very long life span either. I know, I know, it's the addict's choice but the dealer sure enables that choice to continue the addiction.

Sounds like we should legalize them and regulate them like cigarettes and alcohol to me. When was the last time you had someone come up to you and say "Hey man, wanna buy a pack of Marlboros? They're that good menthol stuff from Mexico. How about a fifth of Jack? Fresh from the bathtub!"? Just sayin'. All the money we've spent on the war on drugs and for what? An over flowing prison system which profits off the incarcerated? A fifth of our population with criminal records? A war with the Mexican drug cartels that's now crossing our borders? Dealers on street corners selling to your kids? What is the benefit of this war? What have we gained by outlawing drugs? You just said that people are still destroying their lives with drugs, so again I ask what have we gained?

As to the main topic though, I've never had an issue with the cops save a couple of speeding tickets. Most of you who've had negative dealings with them I wonder how your demeanor is when approached by them. In that line of work I'm sure they develop the same sixth sense that we do overseas that allows them to assess an individual or situation by body language and verbal communication. Is your body tense, are you making eye contact, are you making too much eye contact, are you slurring your speech, are you squeezing your hands, and more importantly, are you putting off a vibe that just makes the hair on their neck stand up. Sounds stupid, but I've been in situations where everything seems normal until suddenly everything gets quiet and your senses go into overdrive and two seconds later you're fighting for your life. You know we feel bad for the OCers who get stopped by the cops because the stop is bad enough, but I've watched enough of the videos and listened to enough of the tapes to understand that most of the bad treatment is brought on themselves. Like that guy in Philly, yes, he was right, he had the right to OC in Philly, BUT if I found myself looking down the barrel of a gun with a clearly agitated cop holding it, the last thing I'm going to do is argue with them. There's a time and place to do that, and that ain't it.

That said, I think there are too many laws which police what we do rather than punish us for what we've done. Too many "intent" laws for my liking since everyone up until they violate another individual's rights has a choice not to. I'd rather see cops more focused on solving crimes than trying to prevent them with BS preemptive laws, so fewer beat cops and more detectives. I don't blame them though, it's the system of law that we've created which is to blame. It's equivalent to blaming a soldier for the nation going to war, and just like soldiers, you've got your bad apples who bring disgrace to the rest of them. You think I like being lumped in with the likes of those turds from Washington who blatantly murdered civilians in Afghanistan? Are we all drug users because there are soldiers dealing and ODing on drugs every week (no lie, a SSG in my unit got busted dealing cocaine and two weeks ago we had a private so F'ed up he had to crawl to his door to open it)?

Point is, start your encounter with a friendly demeanor, be polite, and if they're still unprofessional, get their name and badge number and file a complaint. You'd be surprised how things can go if you start off friendly.

 

[Citizen]

Sounds like we should legalize them and regulate them like cigarettes and alcohol to me. When was the last time you had someone come up to you and say "Hey man, wanna buy a pack of Marlboros? They're that good menthol stuff from Mexico. How about a fifth of Jack? Fresh from the bathtub!"? Just sayin'. All the money we've spent on the war on drugs and for what? An over flowing prison system which profits off the incarcerated? A fifth of our population with criminal records? A war with the Mexican drug cartels that's now crossing our borders? Dealers on street corners selling to your kids? What is the benefit of this war? What have we gained by outlawing drugs? You just said that people are still destroying their lives with drugs, so again I ask what have we gained?

Well, we're almost rid of that pesky 4th Amendment thing that keeps getting in the way of police.

And, we've gained SWAT teams and paramilitary raids on little old ladies, Maryland mayors, that sort of thing. I for one am glad those vicious criminals are under some degree of control, even if you aren't. Jeez, just the side-benefit of all the family-pet dogs eradicated in these raids is a boon to America.

What are you trying to do? Undermine the power of the government or something?

 

[ABNinfantryman]

Well, we're almost rid of that pesky 4th Amendment thing that keeps getting in the way of police.

And, we've gained SWAT teams and paramilitary raids on little old ladies, Maryland mayors, that sort of thing. I for one am glad those vicious criminals are under some degree of control, even if you aren't. Jeez, just the side-benefit of all the family-pet dogs eradicated in these raids is a boon to America.

What are you trying to do? Undermine the power of the government or something?

Oh yeah, forgot about that, we've also gained the fear of flushing our toilets for fear of being shot in the face after dropping a deuce.

One other thing on the topic of crooked cops. I lived in LA for four years and have had friends abused by the LAPD for crimes committed miles away minutes before because they fit the simple description of "Young black male." For such a liberal state California is one of the most fascist places I've been, both in its laws and its treatment of its citizens. My wife was hit while walking by a drugged up driver who had two prior felony convictions and the LAPD did nothing. A West Hollywood Sheriff in our Hollywood neighborhood outside of his jurisdiction arrested my wife because the tags on her car, which was parked in a garage and she never drove, were expired and they released her along one of the worst parts of Sunset Boulevard without any ID, cash, or credit cards forcing her to walk home at 0200 in the morning. The Los Angeles law enforcement agencies are your best examples of crooked departments, and me and mine have had our fair share of dealings with them, but I don't fault all of their members.

 

[SourKraut]

I don't see anyone bashing cops in this thread nor on a 'witch -hunt' ... specifically what are you referring to?

I was refering to an LEO who was not convicted but only accused of commiting a crime being presumed guilty.

Remember what's-his-name from the IMF?

We don't know the whole story, just the side the media reports, and already "the vast majority of LEO's" are "oath-breakers". Maybe some are oath breakers. I am not real familiar with the oaths they take, but I doubt that the vast majority have malicious intent. I am well aware that some LEOs do have malicious intent, and that some are over-zealous flat-out liars.

I don't really care too much for armed representatives of The State. They are a necessary evil, such as the State is a necessary evil.

 

[eye95]

...Every citizen is a threat to police officers until proven otherwise...

This is not true. Officers who think this way do present a threat to the citizenry when they act on this belief.

...Every police officer is a threat to citizens until proven otherwise...

This is not true. Citizens who think this way do present a threat to law enforcement when they act on this belief.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

That's a bit of a strawman argument. There are police, and even entire departments that do horrible things. Some are caught, some are not. Regardless, you can't believeably tell me that the law enforcement profession as a whole is set up to be what the Schutztaffel were.

No you left out my little icon at the end to show I was using hyperbole to illustrate a point. But now that you mention it yes they act and are set up much in the same way. Think about it. Psuedo military title, encouraged to be "proactive", and "preventative" ...hmmm.

It is this that I take issue with. Are there cops (and even departments) that do these things? Yes, absolutely. Does that mean that all, or even most, of them do? No. The ones that do should be taken to task. We have a system for that. Is it perfect? No, but there is a system to change that as well.

Yes most of them do, and the system is a closed loop system, the prosecutors protect the cops, I have personal experience with this. I noticed you left out the examples I included. Or the link I provided showing the national problems we are having with them committing the felony of perjury.

Actually, the vast majority of people cops deal with ARE scumbags. They don't deal with fine, upstanding citizens on a regular basis because fine, upstanding citizens have no reason to talk to, encounter, or deal with the police unless they are in a victim role. It's the crackheads, dealers, drunks, spouse-abusers, mental patients, vagrants, gang-bangers, and general dirtbags that they deal with on a constant basis because those are the people that generate calls.

Emphasis mine. This is a two way street. Erring on the end of thinking every cop is a rights-abusing thug, or using the "could be" philosophy is the problem. If you can't get beyond that... well... that's your right.

Wrong again, this is popular myth propagated by police and politicians to continually support and take more of our tax dollars for their "force". They spend the majority of their time as revenue collectors, and traffic enforcement.

I also will never think of it as a two way street and don't understand those who do. They are public employees hired by us to do a job, they should have no input into how we want to handle or feel about them, period. If they don't like that don't take the job bottom line.

I also want to clarify your assumption that we are inferring every cop is a thug, no one said that. But they are just as wrong when they allow thugs to exist in their department. They are also guilty of being behind every law that unconstitutionally disarms it's citizenry, push for more and more "authority" to violate our 4th amendments, push for laws against citizenry scrutiny (like making it illegal to record them, hmmmm why). They break laws in enforcing laws, terrible.

I will also never trust anything a cop ever says to. SCOTUS has ruled that it is OK for them to lie to you in the course of their investigation, the very fact that made it to SCOTUS shows were "law enforcement" stands. But this has left us with the scary choice to assume every cop is lying to you because he is legally allowed to.

 

[SourKraut]

I will also never trust anything a cop ever says to. SCOTUS has ruled that it is OK for them to lie to you in the course of their investigation, the very fact that made it to SCOTUS shows were "law enforcement" stands. But this has left us with the scary choice to assume every cop is lying to you because he is legally allowed to.

I'll drink to that, good advice.

 

[Deanimator]

I'll drink to that, good advice.

ABSOLUTELY the funniest thing I've EVER seen on television was an episode of "Law & Order" where Benjamin Bratt said with total sincerity, "I'm a cop. I don't lie!" It's funnier than the "food pyramid" scene on "The Simpsons" where the great white shark leaps out of the pond and grabs the gorilla out of the tree!

My trust in the word of police is about on a par with that of my trust in the word of door to door driveway repair contractors...

 

[Kivuli]

No you left out my little icon at the end to show I was using hyperbole to illustrate a point. But now that you mention it yes they act and are set up much in the same way. Think about it. Psuedo military title, encouraged to be "proactive", and "preventative" ...hmmm.

I wasn't replying to the emoticon, I was replying to your statement. Even if you were using it sarcastically, my point remains. The SS were something FAR more sinister of intent and had FAR less restrictions than any police outfit in our country today. No matter the claim below which I will address as well.

Yes most of them do, and the system is a closed loop system, the prosecutors protect the cops, I have personal experience with this. I noticed you left out the examples I included. Or the link I provided showing the national problems we are having with them committing the felony of perjury.

You say you have personal experience with this. Do you have personal experience with the vast majority? If not, that is applying a blanket judgement based on the relatively few you personally know to the entire profession countrywide. That is what I have a problem with. I left out your examples because I did not address them individually and wanted to shave a few lines off the wall o' text I was posting.

Wrong again, this is popular myth propagated by police and politicians to continually support and take more of our tax dollars for their "force". They spend the majority of their time as revenue collectors, and traffic enforcement.

That is a very paranoid outlook in my opinion. It is also false, for which I have personal experience to back up. The State Troopers might do more traffic than most, as well as the specialized traffic units a department might have, but the generic beat cop does what I mentioned before more than anything.

I also will never think of it as a two way street and don't understand those who do. They are public employees hired by us to do a job, they should have no input into how we want to handle or feel about them, period. If they don't like that don't take the job bottom line.

I don't want you to suddenly "like" them. That's never going to happen. You can respect something, even begrudgingly, without liking it (even though I'm sure using the word respect is going to ignite another indignant firestorm). They are public employees hired by the city you live in to do a job, yes. So are the trash collectors, Water resources, Firefighters, planners, maintenance crews, etc. Are they deserving of your scorn as a group when they don't do their job to your liking? Water resources might have to tear up your entire front lawn against your will to fix or replace a water line. Does that mean all water resources guys are jerks? Again, I know this isn't a perfect analogy since "water resources guys don't shoot people, etc", but it'll have to do.

I also want to clarify your assumption that we are inferring every cop is a thug, no one said that.

For your consideration, the relevant parts of various posts (with care to make sure I'm not taking things out of needed context)...

...oathbreakers.

The majority of cops now view their badge as a permission slip to fabricate probable cause to justify behavior beyond their authority (see the video of a California man shooting a 22 rifle in his backyard and watch deputies invent PC to search his home).

Yeah, if you can get 'em to trial over, under, around, and through 1) the blue wall of silence (protection by other cops who stay silent. Or, lie.) 2) Cop-supportive prosecutors. 3) evidence that disappears (because its in police hands--see #1). 4) etc.

The jack-boot part comes from the fact that officers are regularly making demands outside their authority and expecting immediate obedience. They then escalate up to and including lethal force for no justified reason (I have no problem with justified use of force so long as the officer is acting within his or her authority). The system then approves of this behavior by failing to file charges, finding that "the officer followed policy", and other games. The actual problem is the system that allows the LEO's to get away with it. Sal Calusi's murderer Deval V. Bullock, a SWAT team member of Fairfax County who admittedly ND'd into Calusi's chest, received 21 days of unpaid leave.

Do you really believe that the police have NOT become the standing army the Founders warned us about?

....are OK with depriving and infringing our rights just as long as they don't get in trouble for it. When they do get in trouble for it they hold a grudge and work harder to not get in trouble the next time they deprive and infringe....and yes, there will be a next time.

These from a re-read of this thread.

But they are just as wrong when they allow thugs to exist in their department.

Here I agree completely.

They are also guilty of being behind every law that unconstitutionally disarms it's citizenry, push for more and more "authority" to violate our 4th amendments, push for laws against citizenry scrutiny (like making it illegal to record them, hmmmm why). They break laws in enforcing laws, terrible.

Cops have no control over the laws. Your local, state, and federal legislatures do. They enforce what has become law using the system this country set up to produce them. There are ways to change those laws. If you feel the law is unconstitutional (and there are many I feel are as well, you can bet. Why else would I be a member of OCDO?), work to get it changed. Does any of this excuse the behavior of the bad cops? No, but then again, I don't classify this as the same problem.

I will also never trust anything a cop ever says to. SCOTUS has ruled that it is OK for them to lie to you in the course of their investigation, the very fact that made it to SCOTUS shows were "law enforcement" stands. But this has left us with the scary choice to assume every cop is lying to you because he is legally allowed to.

Won't disagree here. You should take anything anyone says with a grain of salt unless it rings true in your own mind. Always be wary when dealing with a cop. Doesn't mean he's a bad apple just because he could be, however.