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.
There seems to be a backlash building whereas the media is producing stories on "heroic cops" in order, it seems, to counter all the stories and bad publicity recently about bad cops.
But here is the thing.
Good cops don't need defending for their good actions. Most people are happy to see them going about their duties (i.e. doing their jobs). What people DON'T WANT is this attitude and tradition where bad cop are still being protected... in my eyes this throws out so much of a "good cop's" honorable reputation and makes them just another part of the problem.
Amazing how they report it as "an alleged assault"...really? just look at the mans face and you can see it was not alleged.
I agree that bad cops are definitely spoiling the public opinion of all cops. Too bad they insist on sheltering their rotten apples rather than throwing them out.
1) always keeps a donut in your car
2) when approached by a donut hunter (cop), immediately throw donut as far away as possible
3) the aggressive donut hunter will be distracted
4) run Forest run!!! GTFO of there fast!
5) live to see another day and post about the ordeal on facebook
1) always keeps a donut in your car
2) when approached by a donut hunter (cop), immediately throw donut as far away as possible
3) the aggressive donut hunter will be distracted
4) run Forest run!!! GTFO of there fast!
5) live to see another day and post about the ordeal on facebook
There seems to be a backlash building whereas the media is producing stories on "heroic cops" in order, it seems, to counter all the stories and bad publicity recently about bad cops.
But here is the thing.
Good cops don't need defending for their good actions. Most people are happy to see them going about their duties (i.e. doing their jobs). What people DON'T WANT is this attitude and tradition where bad cop are still being protected... in my eyes this throws out so much of a "good cop's" honorable reputation and makes them just another part of the problem.
I've thought about it too. I think it can be dangerous to stop addressing the issue too soon. Not a lot of laws have been changed in a lot of places and its the elections coming up.
We have to get protections in this area, and as far as our privacy imo.
We just gotta keep on recording with our cell phones and personal dashcams (Not police dashcams, those can be manipulated with) and hope for the best and wish for a nationwide improvement in the law enforcement behavior situation. Can't give up hope & certainly can't let these losers affect our daily lives!
There seems to be a backlash building whereas the media is producing stories on "heroic cops" in order, it seems, to counter all the stories and bad publicity recently about bad cops.
But here is the thing.
Good cops don't need defending for their good actions. Most people are happy to see them going about their duties (i.e. doing their jobs). What people DON'T WANT is this attitude and tradition where bad cop are still being protected... in my eyes this throws out so much of a "good cop's" honorable reputation and makes them just another part of the problem.
You have no idea. In the department I am affiliated with, over 30% of staff and 40% of officers had their identities stolen this year. Every time one of them gets their name in the news (especially if it is for a "good" thing), someone goes after their 457(b) and IRA accounts, because they know those are not FDIC insured.
Bad things happen to good cops constantly just because people hate cops; and the good cops are actually bigger targets than the bad cops, because people especially hate cops who make cops look good.
My question here is. Why was this US Marshal not arrested for assault ON THE SPOT by the local cops instead of having a friendly chit chat?
[/quote]
Because there is more to the story than that. For one thing, the other witnesses (there were many witnesses to what happened besides the four people involved) said that Janet Akers threw the first punches and that the US Marshall never used his firearm to pistol whip Akers. The US Marshall is forbidden by his employer from telling his story publicly, and the Akers are taking advantage of that. Want something that will set off your BS detector? “[Officers] told us he was an off-duty police officer," Donald said. "That’s exactly what they told us.”
Officers would never call a US Marshall an off-duty officer. Never.
Also, arrests for simple assault are rare (it is not a felony). They are only used when it is necessary to clear someone from the scene, otherwise people are normally only detained and cited. All four people, including the Akers, involved in the incident were cited for assault. None of them were arrested, including the Akers.
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.
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.
