U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-04-2015, 09:55 AM
 
5,036 posts, read 3,327,862 times
Reputation: 4857

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by marigolds6 View Post
Auxiliary police are not police officers. They are a cost cutting measure to use unpaid volunteers to replace some of the duties of more expensive paid police officers, and it is a stupid stupid idea imposed from above by politicians who wanted to save money and reduce liability. The NYC program has allowed NYC to replace over 500 officers with unpaid volunteers.
If they're volunteers then they wouldn't have arrest powers, no?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-04-2015, 10:44 AM
 
Location: St Louis, MO
4,677 posts, read 4,589,615 times
Reputation: 2966
Quote:
Originally Posted by NVplumber View Post
If the powers that be are so concerned with potential liability, why allow this "equipment" (read..weapons) to be so widely deployed? Very simply, liability is almost a zero concern. A cop will, with RARE exception, always be exonerated in deployment of force, even if it results in the death of a citizen, in a situation where lethal force is not even justified. Liability concerns? That's laughable. They control the courts. No worries there.
I don't think you understand, but defining a continuum like this and creating this array of weaponry, that makes it easier to exonerate the office and clear the local government of liability. These are exactly the mechanism that allow the politicians to control the courts.
Again, you are placing blame at the level of the police officer, when the police officer is not the one who makes these decisions. It is exactly like blaming the military for war.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2015, 10:46 AM
 
Location: St Louis, MO
4,677 posts, read 4,589,615 times
Reputation: 2966
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordSquidworth View Post
If they're volunteers then they wouldn't have arrest powers, no?
State of New York gave them arrest powers. Auxiliaries came out of WWII era laws when cities did not have enough police officers and resorted to minimally trained volunteers with on view arrest powers. Only problem is, many cities decide to keep them and expand them because they are so much cheaper than paid offices. New York not only did that, but they expanded their arrest powers to include warrants arrests.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2015, 10:59 AM
 
Location: Houston, TX
13,132 posts, read 7,387,994 times
Reputation: 27249
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaldoKitty View Post
Link to the real story about what happened.

Apparently grandma had a court order that required that she stay away from the kids.

So she ignores it and goes to the school where the parents would, presumably, not be there. The school/police did their job so grandma decides to defy the cops. Well... You know the rest of that story.
Agreed. I stopped believing The Freethought's version of events after reading this phrase "As with most police encounters, he refused to hear any explanation that she attempted to give him. . . "
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2015, 11:01 AM
 
Location: NW Nevada
13,341 posts, read 10,898,841 times
Reputation: 12285
Quote:
Originally Posted by marigolds6 View Post
I don't think you understand, but defining a continuum like this and creating this array of weaponry, that makes it easier to exonerate the office and clear the local government of liability. These are exactly the mechanism that allow the politicians to control the courts.
Again, you are placing blame at the level of the police officer, when the police officer is not the one who makes these decisions. It is exactly like blaming the military for war.
The blame does not, hardly, involve ONLY those in power. " Always remember, even if those who move you, be Kings, or, men of power, the soul belongs to the man. When you stand before God, you cannot say : But, I was told by others to do thus. This will not suffice". If there is such a problem with these policies, among rank and file, THEY need to speak up, and stop following, blindly. Otherwise, they are just as culpable in the wrong of it.

I understand , quite well. If its wrong, its wrong, and if these "poor" cops are being , so beset, by wrongness , in leadership and policy, as the ones expected to carry that wrong out, they have a duty, to We the People, who they are sworn to represent, to address those wrongs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2015, 11:15 AM
 
Location: St Louis, MO
4,677 posts, read 4,589,615 times
Reputation: 2966
Quote:
Originally Posted by NVplumber View Post
The blame does not, hardly, involve ONLY those in power. " Always remember, even if those who move you, be Kings, or, men of power, the soul belongs to the man. When you stand before God, you cannot say : But, I was told by others to do thus. This will not suffice". If there is such a problem with these policies, among rank and file, THEY need to speak up, and stop following, blindly. Otherwise, they are just as culpable in the wrong of it.

I understand , quite well. If its wrong, its wrong, and if these "poor" cops are being , so beset, by wrongness , in leadership and policy, as the ones expected to carry that wrong out, they have a duty, to We the People, who they are sworn to represent, to address those wrongs.
Police officers have first amendment restrictions on their ability to lobby policy that do not exist for other people. That is why police unions exist, and why those unions are only staffed by people who are not officers. But outside the northeast, those unions are being disbanded, outlawed, and restricted to prevent the type of outspokenness that you are talking about. Here in Missouri, there are only two police unions left in the entire state. The governor himself went so far as to interfere in the elections of both unions by having anyone who ran against the governor's slate expelled from the union, and then having the new boards hire "managers" who support the governor to long term no termination contracts.
Fighting the Police Union - 24thState

In other words, they may have such a duty, but politicians are not stupid. They have stripped them of their right to "address those wrongs".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2015, 12:03 PM
 
Location: NW Nevada
13,341 posts, read 10,898,841 times
Reputation: 12285
Quote:
Originally Posted by marigolds6 View Post
Police officers have first amendment restrictions on their ability to lobby policy that do not exist for other people. That is why police unions exist, and why those unions are only staffed by people who are not officers. But outside the northeast, those unions are being disbanded, outlawed, and restricted to prevent the type of outspokenness that you are talking about. Here in Missouri, there are only two police unions left in the entire state. The governor himself went so far as to interfere in the elections of both unions by having anyone who ran against the governor's slate expelled from the union, and then having the new boards hire "managers" who support the governor to long term no termination contracts.
Fighting the Police Union - 24thState

In other words, they may have such a duty, but politicians are not stupid. They have stripped them of their right to "address those wrongs".
Indeed. So, what you are saying, is that the police have no choice, but to accept , unquestioning, obedience to the way of things. And, by default, we citizens are , also, forced to do the same. Which means , unquestioning obedience to the police, or face the consequences, on the street, with no hope of recourse, and that the police themselves, regardless of personal misgivings, must be willing participants in the resultant injustice. Or else.

Or else what? They lose their job as a cop? Doesn't sound like a job I would want, anyway. If what you describe, is truly the case, and, as so many assert, there are far more good cops than bad, how can this be let stand? Personally, I would drop my badge and gun on the deck, spit on it, and walk out. Heading for the nearest TV station with a suitcase full of documentation.

Seems, to me, that the vast majority of cops, actually, kinda like this situation. Why stick around, otherwise? Must be no shortage of folks who LIKE the idea of unfettered authority and immunity from wrongdoing. This assertion, also, discfedits another posters statements, that "rigorous" mental eval, looking for only those with a leaning toward the public good and respect of citizens rights, are being chosen for LE duty. Instead, they are looking for obedient soldiers, not public servants.

Well, that is what's out there. Obedient soldiers, demanding unquestioning obedience from citizens. So, I guess what your saying adds up, in that regard. What doesn't add up, is that so many "good" cops , are powerless to do anything about that. If they, truly, don't like it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2015, 12:13 PM
 
Location: St Louis, MO
4,677 posts, read 4,589,615 times
Reputation: 2966
Quote:
Originally Posted by NVplumber View Post
Or else what? They lose their job as a cop? Doesn't sound like a job I would want, anyway. If what you describe, is truly the case, and, as so many assert, there are far more good cops than bad, how can this be let stand?
They can quit. And a lot do (over 50% quit in their first 4 years).

But that's why local government use deferred income programs (if you quit, you leave huge amounts of money on the table), revolving door restrictions (if you quit, you cannot work in the security sector for 12-24 months after quitting), and other restrictions to prevent separation that are not otherwise legal in the private sector.

The tipping point is normally around 5-7 years in. Once you reach that point, the amount of lost deferred income and the post-employment restrictions make it financially impossible to quit for most officers unless they are also willing to file for bankruptcy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NVplumber View Post
Heading for the nearest TV station with a suitcase full of documentation..
Sunshine laws would put you in prison for years for doing that. And officers are carefully tracked to prevent creating private archives of records (see CJIS and FEDRamp standards).

Quote:
Originally Posted by NVplumber View Post
Indeed. So, what you are saying, is that the police have no choice, but to accept , unquestioning, obedience to the way of things. And, by default, we citizens are , also, forced to do the same. Which means , unquestioning obedience to the police, or face the consequences, on the street, with no hope of recourse, and that the police themselves, regardless of personal misgivings, must be willing participants in the resultant injustice. Or else.
Or they could learn that the enemy is their elected officials and not the police. But guess who benefits the most from the current situation? (Hint: It is not the police officers.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2015, 12:22 PM
 
Location: Coos Bay, Oregon
7,142 posts, read 8,430,229 times
Reputation: 7702
Quote:
Originally Posted by wheelz View Post
Must have been one heck of a thorough background check on these two:

Auxiliary Police Officers Assault, Handcuff and Rob Deliveryman, NYPD Says - East Harlem - DNAinfo.com New York


Looks more like they counted how many chins they had and said "you're hired."
Police departments openly hire people with criminal records. Most cops have arrest records. Thats the type of people they want to hire as cops. They want to hire thug cops.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2015, 12:26 PM
 
Location: Corona del Mar & Coronado, CA
1,573 posts, read 1,119,987 times
Reputation: 1961
When I Google Mary Poole & Clovis all I get are links to crazy conspiracy site (InfoWars, FreeThought, etc) but nothing from the Fresno Bee. Surely they would have covered such a story. The local ABC station is simply a story on the lawsuit and not the incident itself.

I think there is more (or rather less) than meets the eye.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top