U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [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 05-09-2009, 10:35 PM
 
Location: The Netherlands
8,567 posts, read 14,524,507 times
Reputation: 1573

Advertisements

Whether you are a member of the police, a mayor, or the president, people who's function automatically gives them authority over others eventually will have to deal with corruption.
It just is a sad fact of life that these kinda positions will always call out to people who are easily corruptible.

 
Old 05-09-2009, 10:55 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,613,725 times
Reputation: 35875
Quote:
Originally Posted by JACK SAWYER View Post
Well i think they serve themselves in office? Nothing seems to change much no matter whos in...or at least for me! I have heard children say they want to be president or things like that but never a drug addict!Yes i think they should be a role model,If polititions are known drug addicts kids will think thats ok if a person of power does it it ok for them!Do you think its ok for a semi driver to use drugs? YOU would probably say yes? What if a high trucker killed a loved one going down the road? You are always on the clock when your a mayor or whatever so i dont want a drug user running my business or country!And they are role models and most i think would agree!
Nobody is on the job 24 hours a day. If a person has a job to do, they have an obligation to perform that job according to rule. If it is a job that carries a public trust (policeman, teacher, politician, doctor, etc.) then I have a right to hold them responsible for performing that job. And I have a right to judge them accordingly. What they do in their private lives, off the clock, is their business, as long as it does not interfere with the performance of their public trust. If they have a job which is not in the public trust, what they do on the clock is between them and their boss, and still none of my business what they do in their private time.

To use a conspicuous example, I couldn't care less what Bill Clinton does with Monica Lewinsky, as long as it does not interfere with the performance of his duties and responsibilities as the President of the United States. As far as I'm concerned, he did Monica on his coffee break.

To bring it back on topic, I don't care what a cop does on his weekend off, as long as it is not criminal. (Not that I object to some criminal behavior, but it opens him to professional hypocrisy. as an officer of the law.) If he honorably protects and serves as he is sworn to do after roll call, he's a good cop. If he doesn't, he's not.
 
Old 05-09-2009, 11:20 PM
 
485 posts, read 903,845 times
Reputation: 100
Default ???

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
Nobody is on the job 24 hours a day. If a person has a job to do, they have an obligation to perform that job according to rule. If it is a job that carries a public trust (policeman, teacher, politician, doctor, etc.) then I have a right to hold them responsible for performing that job. And I have a right to judge them accordingly. What they do in their private lives, off the clock, is their business, as long as it does not interfere with the performance of their public trust. If they have a job which is not in the public trust, what they do on the clock is between them and their boss, and still none of my business what they do in their private time.

To use a conspicuous example, I couldn't care less what Bill Clinton does with Monica Lewinsky, as long as it does not interfere with the performance of his duties and responsibilities as the President of the United States. As far as I'm concerned, he did Monica on his coffee break.

To bring it back on topic, I don't care what a cop does on his weekend off, as long as it is not criminal. (Not that I object to some criminal behavior, but it opens him to professional hypocrisy. as an officer of the law.) If he honorably protects and serves as he is sworn to do after roll call, he's a good cop. If he doesn't, he's not.
I am sorry but i dont know what you are saying by there time off and what they do?But i am thinking if its drugs you are talking about your wrong[if thats what you are saying]Maybe a drug testesting program should be used on all people with a badge and in elected office!Like a pizza delivery guy or anyone else....they get fired!maybe i missed your point if so sorry...
 
Old 05-09-2009, 11:22 PM
 
485 posts, read 903,845 times
Reputation: 100
And i agree about what you said about Bill kinda! Thats human nature..
 
Old 05-10-2009, 12:05 AM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,613,725 times
Reputation: 35875
Owing to the fact that a cap can and does arrest people for breaking the law, you sort of have to draw the line at law-breaking, and say a cop probably oughtn't toke up a joint while relaxing on his weekend off. But if a cop has an affair with his wife's sister, or says the F-word, or drinks to much wine with supper, or lets his kid watch an R-rated movie, I have no right to judge him for that if it does not interfere with his performance as a police officer while on duty. That's what I mean by "time off".

As for non-cops, criminality even ceases to be an issue. What do I care if a teacher lights up a joint on Saturday night and/or gets laid, if she is a good and competent and diligent teacher during the day?
 
Old 05-10-2009, 12:57 AM
 
485 posts, read 903,845 times
Reputation: 100
Default i see

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
Owing to the fact that a cap can and does arrest people for breaking the law, you sort of have to draw the line at law-breaking, and say a cop probably oughtn't toke up a joint while relaxing on his weekend off. But if a cop has an affair with his wife's sister, or says the F-word, or drinks to much wine with supper, or lets his kid watch an R-rated movie, I have no right to judge him for that if it does not interfere with his performance as a police officer while on duty. That's what I mean by "time off".

As for non-cops, criminality even ceases to be an issue. What do I care if a teacher lights up a joint on Saturday night and/or gets laid, if she is a good and competent and diligent teacher during the day?
I agree,cops are people to and should be allowed there private life!But like i said they are people and a handfull i would say are crooks!Not all but a few like i said before my ex brother inlaw done things the people who elcted him would not be proud of! Money can turn a lot of people in to crooks,,,i just dont know my price lol...i am not a official,
 
Old 05-10-2009, 08:31 AM
 
Location: Nebraska
4,222 posts, read 6,998,099 times
Reputation: 6603
What I don't trust are people like Jtur and TrickyD. They both imply that POLICE are not trust worthy however in any of the threads that promote gun ownership by citizens, the only protection a citizenry has from the police, they both promote taking firearms away for citizens.

Read through their previous comments and I think you will see a pattern.

GL2
 
Old 05-10-2009, 08:54 AM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,613,725 times
Reputation: 35875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunluvver2 View Post
What I don't trust are people like Jtur and TrickyD. They both imply that POLICE are not trust worthy however in any of the threads that promote gun ownership by citizens, the only protection a citizenry has from the police, they both promote taking firearms away for citizens.

Read through their previous comments and I think you will see a pattern.

GL2
What I don't trust is people like Gunluvver2, who never reads the posts of people that he puts words in the mouths of. Go back and do us the favor of quoting the post in which I promoted taking firearms away from citizens.

As a matter of fact, I have frequently posted on this forum and others, that the 2nd Amendment was written primarily to enable the people to defend themselves against what the preamble calls "abuse and misconstruction" of the constitution. I.e.,the police.

There is an interesting thread "gunfree America" going on, that you might enjoy. Some of your gun nut friends have just this morning promoted vigilante citizens using force of gunpoint to deny people of their 5th, 6th and 7th Amendment rights. Those posters are backed into a corner and desperate for an argument to get out---they need your help.

By the way, where does the second amendment or any other part of the bill of rights say that only "citizens" have a right to bear arms, and not just "people"?
 
Old 05-10-2009, 10:20 AM
 
Location: The Netherlands
8,567 posts, read 14,524,507 times
Reputation: 1573
Originally Posted by Gunluvver2
Quote:
They both imply that POLICE are not trust worthy however in any of the threads that promote gun ownership by citizens, the only protection a citizenry has from the police, they both promote taking firearms away for citizens.
I never posted that the Dutch police is not trust worthy.
I can't comment on the American PD because I have no experience at all with them.
Besidez, I'm not in the habit of blindly trusting people Iíve never met before.
 
Old 05-10-2009, 01:01 PM
 
Location: 95468
1,383 posts, read 2,065,834 times
Reputation: 937
I had an officer lie in court about a littering ticket. He knew beforehand that it was necessary and came anyway. The right thing would have been to just not show up. I'm still puzzled as to why. It seems like a cheap price for your honor.
They also don't need to be such jerks.
But without them your neighborhood would look like Detroit on a bad night.
It's a love hate relationship.
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.


Closed Thread

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 > Great Debates
Similar Threads
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