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 05-01-2009, 09:28 AM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,107 posts, read 34,357,433 times
Reputation: 4893

Advertisements

I'm armed all the time.

And unlike Police Officers, it is concealed.

 
Old 05-01-2009, 10:49 AM
 
339 posts, read 627,161 times
Reputation: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
I think the central core argument I am hearing from most people, if I can sum it up, is this:

In any profession, there are going to be some malevolent or abusive of just incompetent ones. Pharmacists, bus drivers, Wal-Mart greeters, bank tellers, little-league coaches. It is impossible to screen out the bad guys.

The problem is, the police are the only bad guys that have a gun and the authority to use it with deadly force in any situation in which they feel threatened, coupled with the tacit assumption that they are always right.

Correct me if I'm wrong so far.
Well...as you can see from this forum, the part where you say "with the tacit assumption that they are always right" is not right at all. Some people could witness a suspect pull a gun on a cop for no reason other than they were stopped for speeding (or whatever), witness the cops shoot the person and still say that the cop didn't have the right, should have shot the gun out the persons hand (yes...some people actually say this), shouldn't even have stopped the person to begin with, etc. I think this also depends on geographical location. The west coast attitude towards cops (or anything for that matter) is a little different than many places. What may be considered okay in the south (for example) may not at all be considered okay in the west at all. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, not that this has a lot to do with this debate but does show a mentality, thinks that criminals wouldn't commit crimes if cops would just invite criminals over for Thanksgiving dinner instead of arresting them (j/k).

I believe that you are way overboard with the ability for a cop to shoot anyone in any situation where they feel threatened comment. There are cops that work for 30 years and never shoot their gun once (other than in training) who have seen some $hi*. There are many of "suspects" that could have been shot (and will acknowledge this themselves) who weren't. There are tons of suicide by cop situation where the person purposely gets themselves shot because they want to and the truth on this sometimes will never fully be known (no notes, little indication, etc.).

I think you, and I mean no offense (just being honest), are waaaaaaaaaaaaay too inherently suspicious of the police (based on past comments and referring to them as bad guys, etc.). I will tell you that I believe that 99 percent are good, and I know for a fact that you rarely ever hear about all the good things that the cops do. You certainly hear about all of the bad things that cops do though, because these are newsworthy. I seem to remember the thing about your friend and the whole car thing (you can correct me if I'm referring to the wrong person), but that's not the cops. It's a dumb f-ing law (a civil matter at best given the facts described). In the end, the cops don't even charge anyone with crimes (contrary to popular opinion). Some people think that cops are charging people with crimes, but that's how much they know about the system. There are plenty of people booked on LEGIT probable cause that are never formerly charged. I'll give one example: A habitual car thief gets caught in yet another stolen car. This could be the 100th stolen car they are caught in or suspected of stealing. Someone not knowing anything about the law may say, "That's easy. This car thief has stolen so many cars that it will be charged and he will be convicted." Not so. You can't bring peoples past history into account unless they testify on their own behalf. Then...you can only bring in their convictions (for crimes of deception). So 1, 100, 1000...it's still only 1 if they don't testify on their own behalf. If this particular case isn't all that great...it may not even get charged. Is there probable cause though...heck yeah. Should the cops book the person for the probable cause? I would say so, but that's a matter of opinon. They don't know if the prosecutor's office will charge, and I gaurantee that they truly believe the person should be charged (but it may not ultimately happen).

Finally, I'll tell you this...you could put up a sign in your yard (not saying you would do anything like this or are this extreme) saying, "I hate cops. Cops are the only criminals!" and they will still come and save you should you ever need saving if you call 9-1-1. And before we get on this debate...calling 9-1-1 has saved many good people from bad people. It's not always too late like some people claim.

Sorry about all the tangents.
 
Old 05-01-2009, 11:03 AM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,523,609 times
Reputation: 35864
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDTD View Post

I believe that you are way overboard with the ability for a cop to shoot anyone in any situation where they feel threatened comment.

I think you, and I mean no offense (just being honest), are waaaaaaaaaaaaay too inherently suspicious of the police .
I prefaced my remarks by pointing out that abuse is limited to a small number of any sample being malevolent or abusive of power or privilege. If this happens to be a cop, he has been given the special privilege of carrying a machine whose sole designed purpose is to kill human beings. Or to otherwise threaten or intimidate citizens with the implicit capacity and license of deadly force.

The central failing of the police as an institution is their unwillingness or inability to police themselves. Or admit to a higher body with the power to police them. This is the issue that needs to be addressed. What happens when the buck stops at the bad guy?
 
Old 05-01-2009, 12:22 PM
 
339 posts, read 627,161 times
Reputation: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
I prefaced my remarks by pointing out that abuse is limited to a small number of any sample being malevolent or abusive of power or privilege. If this happens to be a cop, he has been given the special privilege of carrying a machine whose sole designed purpose is to kill human beings. Or to otherwise threaten or intimidate citizens with the implicit capacity and license of deadly force.

The central failing of the police as an institution is their unwillingness or inability to police themselves. Or admit to a higher body with the power to police them. This is the issue that needs to be addressed. What happens when the buck stops at the bad guy?
Yes. I understand that you prefaced it, but you go on to make generalization comments here and there at the same time. I know it's hard to read context though.

That's not true about police having unwillingness or inability to police themselves. I don't know what the heck goes on whith the police where you or where some of the people who write some of this stuff does. I know that there are certain places though that have cops who consistently do stupid things and f it up for the rest of the cops. It's not hard to figure out where these places are with a little research, and other cops (to include the good ones from those agencies) don't even like them.

You give the impression that there is all this underhanded $hi* going on, but that's simply not true (at least where I'm from). But then again...cops aren't that tempted where I live because they make as much money as lawyers, engineers, etc. do in other places. I guess there is just more expected of the cops here. When you pay someone horrible wages to be a cop like some areas do, you are sometimes going to get the type of people who will accept horrible wages if ya know what I'm saying. When you pay people more, you can raise your expectations a little although you will always get someone who is just and idiot or an a-hole just like any other profession regardless. The guy/gal who would like to be a cop but goes on to be an engineer, etc. may actually become a cop if it paid the same or even close for that matter. Where I live, it does. So...we get that quality of people. If you pay someone "ditch-digger" wages, expect to get people who will accept "ditch-digger" wages (no offense to any ditch-diggers/FOS only). It doesn't make it right by any means, but it seems common sense to me.
 
Old 05-01-2009, 01:07 PM
 
Location: NYC area
3,486 posts, read 4,937,867 times
Reputation: 3848
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
I have sharp knives in my drawer, and I drive a car that seems pretty awesome to kids in the crosswalk.. The police are different in that they are intentionally pre-aremd with weapons whose sole designed purpose to to kill human beings,or threaten to do so, for the purpose of intimidating and/or controlling the citizenry.
I don't see why a person determined to intimidate or control others cannot do that with sharp knives, cars, or privately owned firearms.
 
Old 05-01-2009, 02:47 PM
 
3,277 posts, read 4,492,555 times
Reputation: 1908
I don't trust police in general just like I don't trust people in general. Where I grew up, about the only thing police officers ever accomplish with any real consistency or efficiency is writing enough tickets before the end of the month.
 
Old 05-01-2009, 04:44 PM
 
604 posts, read 1,050,452 times
Reputation: 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDTD View Post
Yes. I understand that you prefaced it, but you go on to make generalization comments here and there at the same time. I know it's hard to read context though.

That's not true about police having unwillingness or inability to police themselves. I don't know what the heck goes on whith the police where you or where some of the people who write some of this stuff does. I know that there are certain places though that have cops who consistently do stupid things and f it up for the rest of the cops. It's not hard to figure out where these places are with a little research, and other cops (to include the good ones from those agencies) don't even like them.

You give the impression that there is all this underhanded $hi* going on, but that's simply not true (at least where I'm from). But then again...cops aren't that tempted where I live because they make as much money as lawyers, engineers, etc. do in other places. I guess there is just more expected of the cops here. When you pay someone horrible wages to be a cop like some areas do, you are sometimes going to get the type of people who will accept horrible wages if ya know what I'm saying. When you pay people more, you can raise your expectations a little although you will always get someone who is just and idiot or an a-hole just like any other profession regardless. The guy/gal who would like to be a cop but goes on to be an engineer, etc. may actually become a cop if it paid the same or even close for that matter. Where I live, it does. So...we get that quality of people. If you pay someone "ditch-digger" wages, expect to get people who will accept "ditch-digger" wages (no offense to any ditch-diggers/FOS only). It doesn't make it right by any means, but it seems common sense to me.
I've never heard of a place where cops make as much as lawyers.
 
Old 05-01-2009, 05:36 PM
 
5,767 posts, read 10,024,297 times
Reputation: 3809
It's also important to remember that far, far more officers are murderd in America than in any other developed country. Hence, it makes sense that they'd have more of a "third-world," on-guard mentality compared to, say, cops in Japan. That can lead to abuses involving the overuse of force. But then again, what would we really expect in that situation?
 
Old 05-01-2009, 05:48 PM
 
Location: Nebraska
4,179 posts, read 9,113,598 times
Reputation: 9523
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
I think the central core argument I am hearing from most people, if I can sum it up, is this:

In any profession, there are going to be some malevolent or abusive of just incompetent ones. Pharmacists, bus drivers, Wal-Mart greeters, bank tellers, little-league coaches. It is impossible to screen out the bad guys.

The problem is, the police are the only bad guys that have a gun and the authority to use it with deadly force in any situation in which they feel threatened, coupled with the tacit assumption that they are always right.

Correct me if I'm wrong so far.
Correct in your conclusion, but incorrect in your information-gathering.

Cops do "have a gun and the authority to use it with deadly force in any situation in which they feel threatened, coupled with the tacit assumption that they are always right". But corrupt judges can also take away your life, as can corrupt district attorneys, prosecutors, investigators - as well as pharmacists, physicians, nurses, military men; the list goes on and on. All are people placed in positions of trust which lends them increased power over others. All are people who find out eventually that power can be abused for their own gain and others' loss. Not all choose to abuse that power. Some do. Most don't. The few that do make everything harder for those who do not.

While I know and can appreciate what one officer or even one poorly-run department can do to innocent individuals, distrusting ALL police because of the actions of a few is setting oneself up to approve and even promote anarchy. "Whom shall guard the guardians?" is an historic question that has yet to be answered. When you trust people with your safety and your life, and that trust is thwarted, you feel like you have no choice but to choose to protect and trust only yourself. So the trust that we place in police officers, attorneys, physicians - is tenuous at best, and easily destroyed by those who use that trust for their own gain.

I've had doctors who nearly killed me, judges who refused to follow the law and put people in jail or made them pay fines who were innocent, cops who tried to sell my son drugs, nurses who almost let my husband die because of their inattention to and ignorance of their jobs - should I therefore say that all nurses and judges and doctors and cops are bad and evil and rotten? Or is it my responsibility to help insure that these people are removed from their positions or at least shown that their illegal or dangerous acts are not acceptable and are in fact prosecutable?

I have always chosen the latter.
 
Old 05-01-2009, 06:07 PM
 
2,380 posts, read 6,073,907 times
Reputation: 2029
Do not trust any part of government top to bottom,dishonest,greedy amd corrupt,enough said.
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