I'll toss on my flame suit and ask this question. I wish it could remain civil and factual but this is the 'fire after all. A few past and now some recent events have me pondering this question and I'm looking for honest information from our LEO and law professionals here.
We hear about the few bad apples when it comes to bad cops. Some say 1% others 10% or even more. What is your definition of a "bad cop"? It is your duty to enforce the law. You are not above the law although some of them pertain to you differently. As in any profession, that person is expected to have greater knowledge and understanding in their field. That does not seem to be the case anymore.
I cannot claim innocence to a crime because of my ignorance to the law. Why is it fair for an arresting officer to take a person into custody then try to figure out what law was broken? Why is it okay for them to arrest me then drop charges later? That arrest is on my record even though I was innocent. They are not held accountable for infringing on our rights and all they have to do is claim ignorance.
Anyway, back to the original question. To all the "good cops" out there or any professional of the law, have you ever looked the other way while one of your brothers have broken the law? I hear about officer discretion but why aren't you held to a higher standard?
Are you still considered a good cop if you follow everything to the book but let other LEO slide while they fail at their paid profession?
I live in a very rural area and the majority of folks are good honest people. Our ratio of LEO to population is absurd. I'm not sure how so many bad apples can fit in one barrel. We have some great officers but the ratio isn't good. Just recently we have a couple that have been fired for beating the crap out of people while on duty, one for shooting up buildings twice and a trooper that is deemed Giglio impaired. These are just a few of the instances that are public. There are many more swept under the rug by their buddies.
I used to always give the benefit to the LEO but it is now the opposite. In my opinion this profession is going to hell and it is up to the good guys to turn it around. Are you up for the task?
It would be nice if we could get LEO to answer the simple question of, "Do you consider the 4th amendment of the constitution as an impediment to conducting your work, or an essential right that trumps the added effort for you to show probable cause and get a judge to grant you a warrant"
To me that's the gold standard of good cop / bad cop. I'd venture to say if we could use that litmus test, issues of comply or be tazed, cops that never back down when challenged, etc., would for the most part go away as if by magic.
When asked the definition of "cheating" I always say ask your spouse because its different and biased in every case.
When asking about bad cops, don't ask a cop.
I watch people getting heated over the gas shortage and gas pump lines affecting roadways, where are the cops, writing tickets instead of directing things.
I wish everyone would stop harping on cops. The cop on the street is expected to do a mountain of tasks perfectly; much of it above their capacity. Generally, the people who are willing to take these jobs are only willing to wrestle crackheads for a living just because they don't have any better options. They have limited capacity and too much is expected of them.
If you want to look at good and bad, look up the chain to those who hire, train and direct.
1. I do my job within the Constitution. It's not a hindrance, it is the standard. The people I work with are the same. The end doesn't justify the means if you break the rules and violate the Constitution on the way.
2. The thin blue line issue that people complain so much about is BS. As with any community, there is a bond between police officers. However, I have never seen nor would I allow anyone to violate a persons Consitutional rights, and not step in and say something. The people I work with are the same. We demand it of each other from the beginning of the hiring process, through the academy and field training, to daily life on the street. I wouldn't be apart of it, if things were any other way.
Now, that said...there are bad people in every profession. Welders, plumbers, doctors and judges. Occasionally, they slip through the cracks and are identified in some unfortunate and potentially embarrassing situation. That's regrettable but people are human. Generally speaking, you get what you pay for. If you're not happy with what you have, let your city counsel or county commission, etc. know that. But...dont bitch when your taxes go up.
Factually? Probably no more than any other profession where certain levels of vetting are required. My guess would be ~5% - 7% of total American cops are "bad cops".
Two primary reasons come to mind, the first being a public that now has instant video of "misdeeds", and second, the pool of candidates to become cops.
Where I worked, the vetting was extremely thorough, yet we had our share of guys go "bad". I think that the lawsuits to allow damned near anyone to be a cop, lowered standards, a lack of psych testing, and a lack of qualified applicants cause LE administrators to hire less than stellar people for a very powerful position. Plus, most cops don't get paid the big bucks and the incentives to make it a career instead of just a job are rapidly going away.
Will there always be "bad cops". Yes, because we hire human beings.
A couple of your comments above interest me. "Why is it fair for an arresting officer to take a person into custody then try to figure out what law was broken? a LEO has an obligation to enforce the law. If you are suspected of committing a crime, it's appropriate for the LEO to "detain" you while trying to figure out the details. If the elements of a crime are present, and you are part of those elements, then you get charged. If not, you are released. The public expects LEOs to take appropriate action and letting a suspect go and figuring out later that they are the one who committed the crime does nothing to insure accountability and public safety.
Why is it okay for them to arrest me then drop charges later? Did the cops drop the charges or the Prosecutor's Office? Most likely it was the Prosecutor's Office since cops have the ability to release someone who has been detained, but I know of no jurisdiction where the cops can drop formal charges once they are filed. That is what Prosecutors do, quite often at their discretion. In many cases, it's not because the person wasn't guilty, but either the Prosecutor felt that they couldn't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, their budget was too low to take it to court, or there are more serious crimes that need their resources. In other cases, the Prosecutor looks at the facts as presented by the LEO and decides that the elements don't fit after all. Wouldn't you rather have the charges dropped than have them hanging over your head? Taking someone into custody is not done lightly as I will explain in answering the other points'
That arrest is on my record even though I was innocent. They are not held accountable for infringing on our rights and all they have to do is claim ignorance. " Yes the arrest is on your record, but most people interested in your background give you an opportunity to explain what happened as far as the charges being dropped. Most businesses ask "have you ever been convicted", not "have you ever been arrested". Those who do ask about the "arrest" vs. the "conviction" should allow for proof of no adjudication and use that as the basis for hiring or not.
The second part of your statement is not quite true. There are avenues for civil rights infringement, most notably suing in Federal Court for a Title 1983 violation. This type of law suit is very serious and is not taken lightly by any agency or officer. No one in LE wants a Title 1983 violation on their history. Think of it as being akin to being accused, tried and convicted of raping small children. People who are found guilty are faced with imprisonment, big dollar fines, and an agency can find itself under a "Consent Decree" ordering that every facet of day-to-day police work is monitored by federal observers (read lawyers). It would be like a lawyer looking over your shoulder 24/7/365 while you try to do your job and they are looking for the slightest mistake.
As to "all they have to do is claim ignorance", this is something that will come out in a Title 1983 violation suit. They will dig into every facet of training that officer has received, from academy training to FTO (Field Training Officer", to personnel records to see if this subject has been addressed. If it has, the LEO's ass is cooked. The agency has to prove that it not only trained the LEO properly, but that it also maintained that standard and has not ignored other instances of the same behavior in this LEO or any other LEO in that agency.
There is a "good faith exception" where the LEO thought they were doing the right thing, but were wrong. That bit of human nature also has to be taken into consideration. What has to be examined is whether the LEO SHOULD have known that it wrong. That's pretty easy to figure out at the Internal Affairs level.
Once again, the LE agency belongs to the citizens and the citizens have to hold it accountable. No one else will.
,Every law officer I have ever met here in Fremont County WY has been a standup person, even though personality-wise a few of them are not Mr. Sparkle. They have a tough job here , being spread thinly throughout a very large rural county, and are much appreciated by the law-abiding portion of our citizens.
I expressed my opinion. I don't work in New York City and never will. How things are there, I couldn't say. I'm amazed that you would consider me corrupt because someone else had a different view. That's OK, I don't value your opinion either, Harry.
A welders welds fail = Fired A plumbers joints leak = Fired A Doctors surgery fails = Fired A cops tickets are dismissed = Keeps his job and bennies.
Low wages justify poor workmanship? That's weak.
A cop that writes me a justified ticket is okay in my book. They're doing their job and that's what I pay them for. One who sees a fellow officer speeding and looks the other way is is of weak conscience and is undeserving to have such authority. We both broke the law yet I'm held to a higher standard.
I'm going for a beer and popcorn run. I'll check back later.
I figure the ratio is about the same as it is among the U.S. citizenry. About 10% are just sorry, about40% don't give a crap about anything but themselves, and the other half are decent folks. The bad ones get all the press.
I expressed my opinion. I don't work in New York City and never will. How things are there, I couldn't say. I'm amazed that you would consider me corrupt because someone else had a different view. That's OK, I don't value your opinion either, Harry.
If you don't realize the thin blue line is as real as the sun rising in the east then indeed the system has corrupted you. And your answer smacks of the smarmy contempt public employees have for the general public these days. Fake and corrupt scam public employee unions breeds that attitude in spades.
I figure the ratio is about the same as it is among the U.S. citizenry. About 10% are just sorry, about40% don't give a crap about anything but themselves, and the other half are decent folks. The bad ones get all the press.
It would be nice if we could get LEO to answer the simple question of, "Do you consider the 4th amendment of the constitution as an impediment to conducting your work, or an essential right that trumps the added effort for you to show probable cause and get a judge to grant you a warrant"
To me that's the gold standard of good cop / bad cop. I'd venture to say if we could use that litmus test, issues of comply or be tazed, cops that never back down when challenged, etc., would for the most part go away as if by magic.
That's simple. The Constitution trumps all of it, particularly the Fourth Amendment. That's why such an inordinate amount of time is given Search & Seizure laws in any LE academy.
In America, if a LEO violates the Fourth Amendment during an investigation, the whole case normally gets tossed There always exceptions which I can explain if someone wants to read another "War & Peace" length book. In addition to the case being tossed, the defendant goes free, irrespective of what they have done.
In most other countries, if their laws on search & seizure are violated, the LEO gets sanctioned (usually a fine) but all of the evidence still can be used against the defendant.
So, if a LEO puts in the work and, because of his/her stupidity, the case is tossed. Then, a couple of things happen to that LEO. In a decent agency (which most are) the LEO gets his/her ass handed to them by their administration, and second (and probably of greater impact to the LEO and the agency) is that every, and I mean EVERY arrest this LEO makes will be under extreme scrutiny not only by the agency, but by the Prosecutors and particularly by the Defense Bar. A prosecutor may decide to drop any case this LEO is involved in, meaning the LEO has no purpose. Then, they get terminated and they will most likely never work as a LEO again. Anywhere. No credibility, no job.
Oh, yeah, it's nice to daydream of not needing "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" and "no 4th Amendment issues to worry about", but that isn't reality. That is a corrupt, evil organization.
As to the " issues of comply or be tazed, cops that never back down when challenged, etc" going away, nah, there are still human beings with their issues, some of them repairable, some not. Those that can be fixed, should be. The others, perhaps they would do well to become lion tamers in the circus 'cause they damned sure ain't cut out for LE.
Anyway, back to the original question. To all the "good cops" out there or any professional of the law, have you ever looked the other way while one of your brothers have broken the law? I hear about officer discretion but why aren't you held to a higher standard? Broken the law or a traffic code? Broken the law, no. In fact I turned in the Sergeant I had as a rookie for stealing and testified against her. Have I given a fellow cop a break for speeding? Yup! Just as I have given countless other people the same break. Not everyone gets a ticket. I HAVE written a LEO a ticket because they gave me no other choice. The idiot flashed his badge at me and TOLD me to let him go. Surprise! He wasn't very happy and told my supervisor exactly that. My Sergeant told him to "go cry on someone else's shoulder 'cause his "giveashitter" was broke that day"
We ARE held to a higher standard, that's why everything a LEO does wrong is immediately seized upon and spread all over. You just don't see that with plumbers, electricians, dentists, secretaries, etc...
Are you still considered a good cop if you follow everything to the book but let other LEO slide while they fail at their paid profession? NO. You're not a good cop if you observe a crime being committed and you walk away from it. We all get painted with the same, broad brush, regardless if we are the one committing the crime, just because we wear the same uniform. My integrity means everything to me. Without it I cannot hold my head up. My self respect would not allow it, and almost every LEO I have ever met lives by the same rule.
I have over 26 years in LE, and am very proud of my life. It's not just a job, nor a career, it's a life.
,Every law officer I have ever met here in Fremont County WY has been a standup person, even though personality-wise a few of them are not Mr. Sparkle. They have a tough job here , being spread thinly throughout a very large rural county, and are much appreciated by the law-abiding portion of our citizens.
I can't speak about other parts of the country. In my area,cops doing shady things are the norm rather than the exception. I would say at least 80% are at least complicit in the cover up.
Of course there is corruption. Cops are human beings, subject to every human foible and failure. That doesn't mean it is rampant, nor as pervasive as you would make people believe.
As I have stated elsewhere, a fish rots from the head down. If there are corrupt cops, it's because the administration allows it Then, it's the citizen's job to change that administration. Granted, most LEO's are civil service, but they ultimately are guided by a politician, or politicians, who hire & fire heads of agencies. Remember Mr. Comey?
However, that "Thin Blue Line" that you sneer at isn't all about corruption, it's about being part of something you will never be able to understand. Just as I will never be able to understand the bond between some of our own Campfire members who served in combat together.
Then I thank you good sir. I only wish there were more folks with such moral integrity.
There are. Tens of thousands of them wearing the badge and gun everyday. It's just that they don't get the publicity.
I never got up, put on my uniform and went out onto the streets so I could be recognized as some sort of "hero". I did it because I absolutely loved beating criminals at their own game and I love the thrill of the hunt and the satisfaction that comes when I got to make a difference, no matter how slight, in someone else's life.
One less scheitbag off of the street for a while, one less drunk driver endangering other people, one less dope dealer plying his trade for a while, one less burglar taking someone else's hard earned property away from them, one less person creeping around neighborhoods, one less call to have to respond to, one less assault. Those were the goals every day. If a LEO looks at all of the crime, all of the misery, all of the wrongs, he/she will get overwhelmed, so we take just one thing at a time, making one small difference at a time.
And we get back up the next day and do it again because it's who we are, not just what we do.
I can't speak about other parts of the country. In my area,cops doing shady things are the norm rather than the exception. I would say at least 80% are at least complicit in the cover up.
Mr. Clark, if that's truly the case, then you have a lot of work ahead of you. It's your part of the country, it's your responsibility to make sure the right people are taking care of it, because no one else can or will.
1. I do my job within the Constitution. It's not a hindrance, it is the standard. The people I work with are the same. The end doesn't justify the means if you break the rules and violate the Constitution on the way.
2. The thin blue line issue that people complain so much about is BS. As with any community, there is a bond between police officers. However, I have never seen nor would I allow anyone to violate a persons Consitutional rights, and not step in and say something. The people I work with are the same. We demand it of each other from the beginning of the hiring process, through the academy and field training, to daily life on the street. I wouldn't be apart of it, if things were any other way.
Now, that said...there are bad people in every profession. Welders, plumbers, doctors and judges. Occasionally, they slip through the cracks and are identified in some unfortunate and potentially embarrassing situation. That's regrettable but people are human. Generally speaking, you get what you pay for. If you're not happy with what you have, let your city counsel or county commission, etc. know that. But...dont bitch when your taxes go up.
Good answer to a truly idiotic and non-constructive question. In most jurisdictions you swear to protect and serve the US constitution and all its' amendments and those protected by it.
Here's another stupid question, is there another resident of Massofwhoshits as dumb as Harry M?
I'll toss on my flame suit and ask this question. I wish it could remain civil and factual but this is the 'fire after all. A few past and now some recent events have me pondering this question and I'm looking for honest information from our LEO and law professionals here.
We hear about the few bad apples when it comes to bad cops. Some say 1% others 10% or even more. What is your definition of a "bad cop"? It is your duty to enforce the law. You are not above the law although some of them pertain to you differently. As in any profession, that person is expected to have greater knowledge and understanding in their field. That does not seem to be the case anymore.
I cannot claim innocence to a crime because of my ignorance to the law. Why is it fair for an arresting officer to take a person into custody then try to figure out what law was broken? Why is it okay for them to arrest me then drop charges later? That arrest is on my record even though I was innocent. They are not held accountable for infringing on our rights and all they have to do is claim ignorance.
Anyway, back to the original question. To all the "good cops" out there or any professional of the law, have you ever looked the other way while one of your brothers have broken the law? I hear about officer discretion but why aren't you held to a higher standard?
Are you still considered a good cop if you follow everything to the book but let other LEO slide while they fail at their paid profession?
I live in a very rural area and the majority of folks are good honest people. Our ratio of LEO to population is absurd. I'm not sure how so many bad apples can fit in one barrel. We have some great officers but the ratio isn't good. Just recently we have a couple that have been fired for beating the crap out of people while on duty, one for shooting up buildings twice and a trooper that is deemed Giglio impaired. These are just a few of the instances that are public. There are many more swept under the rug by their buddies.
I used to always give the benefit to the LEO but it is now the opposite. In my opinion this profession is going to hell and it is up to the good guys to turn it around. Are you up for the task?
Your question sorta bounces a round a lot but I'll take a stab.
Historically speaking police in the United States are less corrupt than at any time in our nation's history. Reading about the prohibition era up through the 90's will shed a lot of light on just how corrupt the poleece can and have become. But most all of that has been mitigated about as well as it can be due to light being shed on the problem and a whole lot of whistle blowing. Renting Serpico is eye opening and so is Training Day. Both are based on real individuals. But watching The Seven Five is even more so and there is no artistic license in that documentary. It's all very real. It's safe to say those levels of corruption are largely gone. Exceptions always being exceptions.
The definition of a bad cop can be many things. From being outright corrupt in the classical sense and taking money in exchange for closing their eyes, or even being part of a criminal enterprise themselves. But many times a cop can be perceived as corrupt simply because he sucks at his job and should be doing something else.
Some people believe cops have become raging, unforgiving pricks in 2017 and that can be true. But that's more due to the officials we have elected and who they have chose to appoint more than it does the profession itself.
I think you'll see less and less discretion as things progress in this country. Meaning the days of getting a "pass" will be gone forever. It's funny to watch the show COPS. They'll often say "If you tell the truth... (insert bullschit here)..." There was a time this was actually true and that is why it is a widely used tool even today. But the liability of actually letting somebody go so you can catch a real problem in the area is so high, it has transformed into a charlatan type tactic used on everybody from a jaywalker to a rapist. None of them are getting a pass. Especially if one of the many mandated cameras (dictated by elected officials) is rolling.
If you think the police to non-police ratio is skewed in your area, that's because of the people you elected. My brother lives in a liberal schit hole with little crime. There are cops EVERYWHERE. Same goes for the area my wife is from. So everybody tends to hate cops. They're not corrupt. They're just a pain in the ass with little to do other than raise revenue. I however live in a mostly conservative area and while the law enforcement around here can still make mistakes, their goal is not to bust balls and raise revenue for the city. They spend the majority of their time addressing issues that the citizens want addressed. This is mostly prevalent in small towns. You'll rarely find an Austin, Baltimore, or Chicago cop stopping a guy for speeding on his way to work at 0700. But you'll sure as schit find that in the wealthy suburbs.
Another issue facing LE in general these days is that they are narrowing their scope of recruitment to people that have never been in trouble in their life. They mandate zero tolerance on previous drug use and criminal record to include juvenile arrests. Polygraph's are pretty much the norm these days for all major departments and agencies. Of course everybody nods their head and smiles when these type of policies are put in place but just remember those type of cops won't have the slightest sense of empathy for whatever infraction you are alleged of infracting because they will not be the understanding "I was there once" type cop you allegedly remember from the 60's, or the hero Wyatt Earp types in the late 1800's and early 1900's. But also remember that these were the eras police departments have proven to be most corrupt. So pick your poison...
Sportcenter version to this answer? We all get the government we deserve. If the enforcement arm of your local government is corrupt, well.... you live in a corrupt area. If their end goal is to harass, well.... you elected their boss. Not me. Or the police themselves for that matter.
After reading through a couple pages I'm reminded of the case in Idaho, I think it was where the sheriff called a rancher to take care of his bull on the highway. Two staters arrived and killed the rancher, threw his wife and nephew to the ground and apparently got off Scott free. I think one had been fired for misconduct in another office. I used to wave and be friendly with police. I will be friendly if encountering an officer one on one, but don't respect them enough to wave to show my support anymore. It saddens me.
The idea they are a brotherhood is ludicrous to me. They are not like welders or carpenters. A bad welder can mess up a job and it probably is not very dangerous. Same with a carpenter. Maybe the wall is out of square. A cop messes up and someone gets falsely accused or killed with no repercussions. To me they are no better than politicians.
When my son-in-law was stopped the cop added not stopping in a timely manner. There was a bike lane where he could get a ticket for stopping so he went a block and turned on to a side street. His attorney took photos of the area to prove his case; which the judge would not allow. The cop lied and said there was no bike lane. (I know there was a bike lane because I lived on that street.) The judge told the jury not to go check because they were to use only the information presented in court.
They believe its "them against us".
If I'm wrong its their fault. They have not policed their own ranks.
Look at officer pain from Salt Lake City, he coulda just got the blood sample from punching the bad guy in the nose instead of ruffing up an ER nurse, he deserves to be shot in the head.
LE at federal, state, county, and city level. I don't know how many officers are out there, but the vast majority are outstanding people trying to serve their communities while at the same time dealing with personal/family issues (like everybody else) that are magnified by the requirements of their chosen profession.
It would be nice if we could get LEO to answer the simple question of, "Do you consider the 4th amendment of the constitution as an impediment to conducting your work, or an essential right that trumps the added effort for you to show probable cause and get a judge to grant you a warrant"
To me that's the gold standard of good cop / bad cop. I'd venture to say if we could use that litmus test, issues of comply or be tazed, cops that never back down when challenged, etc., would for the most part go away as if by magic.
That's not difficult to answer at all. I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution, and that document, as well as each amendment therein, contains individual rights that are absolutely essential to each and every member in society. The extra time and effort to obtain a search warrant has never been an impediment to doing my job...
The added bonus, if I've had a warrant signed by a judge, it generally saves a lot of time later dealing with various motions and hearings in court regarding the validity of a search.
Gentlemen: I can only speak for my own experiences in my community. Othre communities have other problems than ours.
Originally Posted by White_Bear
.
We hear about the few bad apples when it comes to bad cops. Some say 1% others 10% or even more. What is your definition of a "bad cop"? It is your duty to enforce the law. You are not above the law although some of them pertain to you differently. As in any profession, that person is expected to have greater knowledge and understanding in their field. That does not seem to be the case anymore.
( More to the point, what is your definition of a bad cop? There are lots of types of cops just like there are lots of kinds of people. The same can be said for organizations. Leadership sets the tone and affects the entire system. While your city might be lucky to get effective, dedicated, and professional cops, there are lazy cops, exhausted cops, overwhelmed cops, burnt out cops, inept cops, and those who try the criminal activities which they are supposed to protect society from. I call the last bad cops. )
Why is it okay for them to arrest me then drop charges later? That arrest is on my record even though I was innocent.
( I have to have probable cause, that is enough evidence to reasonably conclude a crime was committed, in order to arrest. Often charges are dropped for ridiculous reasons. Our county does not have enough money to prosecute 90% of the criminals that we arrest, so the DAs triage their case load and let many obviously guilty people walk free. Sometimes the evidence was there for an arrest but the D.A. cannot get a conviction due to "without any doubt whatsoever of innocence" standard at trials. We have a lot of liberals in the jury pool who watched Oprah/Sally Jessie Raphael/Ellen Degeneres juries that watch a lot of CSI and therefore demand $17, 000, 000 crime lab evidence, or else the cops were just lazy and arrested the poor criminal out of contempt. Sometimes the educated look down on dumb blue collar cops and, in order to be "cool" and to help the downtrodden man of color, let another obvious criminal go free.
Anyway, back to the original question. To all the "good cops" out there or any professional of the law, have you ever looked the other way while one of your brothers have broken the law? I hear about officer discretion but why aren't you held to a higher standard?
(Yes I am held to a higher standard, especially regarding the use of force in order to affect an arrest. "Discretion" is using a advisement instead of a citation. Looking the other way when a "brother" breaks the law? No; and there is a reason I will never get promoted in this town. In the corruption that is San Francisco, a bad cop is peanuts. But it is still intolerable. Often the "bad" ones are actually good ones that have been eliminated politically by the "special"category hires my city prefers.
Are you still considered a good cop if you follow everything to the book but let other LEO slide while they fail at their paid profession?
(I have lost that battle. It is for the supervisors to fix the failures. I often do a better job than the supervisors which gets me disdain and disrespect, until they need me for another dirty job.
I live in a very rural area and the majority of folks are good honest people. Our ratio of LEO to population is absurd. I'm not sure how so many bad apples can fit in one barrel. We have some great officers but the ratio isn't good. Just recently we have a couple that have been fired for beating the crap out of people while on duty, one for shooting up buildings twice and a trooper that is deemed Giglio impaired. These are just a few of the instances that are public. There are many more swept under the rug by their buddies.
( I work in a major city and I have my doubts about a lot of the people who live here. I am sorry your area organization hires those kinds of people for your department. I have heard horror stories other departments with nepotism or gang infiltration.)
I used to always give the benefit to the LEO but it is now the opposite. In my opinion this profession is going to hell and it is up to the good guys to turn it around. Are you up for the task?
(I have no problem with honest people holding their departments to the same standard. Just define your standards and insist they be reckoned with. We took the White House from the corrupt; why not the local law enforcement agencies? But please realize that there are a lot of good people and good agencies out there. You just don't hear about the good ones.)
Originally Posted by 458 Lott
It would be nice if we could get LEO to answer the simple question of, "Do you consider the 4th amendment of the constitution as an impediment to conducting your work, or an essential right that trumps the added effort for you to show probable cause and get a judge to grant you a warrant"
To me that's the gold standard of good cop / bad cop. I'd venture to say if we could use that litmus test, issues of comply or be tazed, cops that never back down when challenged, etc., would for the most part go away as if by magic.
I consider it one of the essential rights. There is a good reason for it. If I have the proof needed to convince a judge to sign his name to a warrant, I have a chance at getting the evidence needed for arrest and hopefully conviction.
But sometimes the belligerent criminal must be arrested. If I let one go free and he kills somebodies kid, how would you feel about my not tazing him? NB: Moot point as I don't have a tasers
You only have to watch to about 49 seconds. Thank God for good Samaritans.
It would be nice if we could get LEO to answer the simple question of, "Do you consider the 4th amendment of the constitution as an impediment to conducting your work, or an essential right that trumps the added effort for you to show probable cause and get a judge to grant you a warrant"
To me that's the gold standard of good cop / bad cop. I'd venture to say if we could use that litmus test, issues of comply or be tazed, cops that never back down when challenged, etc., would for the most part go away as if by magic.
That's not difficult to answer at all. I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution, and that document, as well as each amendment therein, contains individual rights that are absolutely essential to each and every member in society. The extra time and effort to obtain a search warrant has never been an impediment to doing my job...
The added bonus, if I've had a warrant signed by a judge, it generally saves a lot of time later dealing with various motions and hearings in court regarding the validity of a search.
Chris
Let's give a hypothetical that maybe isn't as cut and dry.
You and your partner have been investigating a suspected drug dealer. He has a few priors, so you know he's a real scum ball.
You've had him under surveillance for a few weeks and have been following him to an house that's been converted into an apartment and suspect that's his stash house. You don't know exactly what apartment he's renting, but get a warrant guessing he's in apartment #2. You follow him into the common area of the apartment that has a locked door with a no trespassing sign and didn't knock or announce. You see he goes into apartment #5. Instead of having the warrant updated to reflect the proper apartment number, you execute the warrant on apartment #5 and find drugs stashed in the apartment.
During the trial when the defense attorney asks why you followed him into the common area when the sign said no trespassing, your partner says that he thinks that sign doesn't apply to law enforcement.
The judge is also sworn to uphold the constitution, but he doesn't seem to have an issue with the officers executing the warrant on the wrong apartment, nor that fact that they ignored a no trespass sign without knocking an announcing was an issue.
You can say the drug dealer got what he deserved, another scum bag is off the street. But at what price?
BTW, this wasn't a hypothetical and there were other 4th amendment transgressions such as taking a cell phone from someone who wasn't under arrest, with no warrant, searching through that cell phone to get information that was used to get the search warrant. Again the judge couldn't be trifled with such matters.
I'm sure some out there will conveniently label me as a cop hater, leftist etc. I've never been arrested, never been hassled by a cop, and hold cops in high regard for the tremendous challenges and dangers they face performing their job. I simply consider the Constitution and Bill of Rights as one of the finest documents written by man and one worth holding everyone who is sworn to protect up to that high standard.
Actual % numbers....hmmm dont know , but I have experienced enough to know that they do little to maintain my confidence and trust in them.
the double standards, the dishonesty ,the poor manner of approach, the presumptuous attitude, failure to follow proper procedures, lack of knowledge of the actual laws, etc
what makes it so much worse is the sheer number of police that are nonchalantly complicit with officers who are like the above.
Originally Posted by Harry M
If you don't realize the thin blue line is as real as the sun rising in the east then indeed the system has corrupted you. .
,.... corrupt scam public employee unions breeds that attitude in spades.
that about sums it up....unions by nature hold other parties to ransom.
Please bear with me and help me to understand this scenario; You and your partner have been investigating a suspected drug dealer. He has a few priors, so you know he's a real scum ball.
You've had him under surveillance for a few weeks and have been following him to an house that's been converted into an apartment and suspect that's his stash house. You don't know exactly what apartment he's renting, but get a warrant guessing he's in apartment #2. I don't know how they could have gotten a warrant if they did not know, and stating in the Probable Cause Statement that he lived in #2 would be sworn falsification, a crime and reason to dump the entire case. Plus, criminally charge the officer. He/She would never work as a cop again.
You follow him into the common area of the apartment that has a locked door with a no trespassing sign and didn't knock or announce. How did the cop get into the locked door, following directly behind the suspect? You see he goes into apartment #5.
Instead of having the warrant updated to reflect the proper apartment number, you execute the warrant on apartment #5 and find drugs stashed in the apartment. Bad search & seizure. Direct violation of the Fourth Amendment requirement for search warrant(s).
During the trial when the defense attorney asks why you followed him into the common area when the sign said no trespassing, your partner says that he thinks that sign doesn't apply to law enforcement. Again, how did they get into the common area to see the suspect go into #5?
The judge is also sworn to uphold the constitution, but he doesn't seem to have an issue with the officers executing the warrant on the wrong apartment, nor that fact that they ignored a no trespass sign without knocking an announcing was an issue. Based on your information, the judge is absolutely wrong.
You can say the drug dealer got what he deserved, another scum bag is off the street. But at what price?
BTW, this wasn't a hypothetical and there were other 4th amendment transgressions such as taking a cell phone from someone who wasn't under arrest, with no warrant, searching through that cell phone to get information that was used to get the search warrant. Again, bad search & seizure. The entire case would be thrown out as "Fruit Of The Poisonous Tree".
Again the judge couldn't be trifled with such matters. The judge needs to go away.
I'm sure some out there will conveniently label me as a cop hater, leftist etc. I've never been arrested, never been hassled by a cop, and hold cops in high regard for the tremendous challenges and dangers they face performing their job. I simply consider the Constitution and Bill of Rights as one of the finest documents written by man and one worth holding everyone who is sworn to protect up to that high standard. I fully agree and have done my job exactly to those standards as do most cops. Ed
I taught Search & Seizure, Drug Investigations, and Writing Search Warrants for the Anchorage Police Academy. Applying for a search warrant is no big deal. BTW, I have never been denied a search warrant because I put enough probable cause in the P.C. Statement that it was damned near proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
The Fourth Amendment is right up near the top of the Bill of Rights for a reason. It is THAT important.
Let's give a hypothetical that maybe isn't as cut and dry.
You and your partner have been investigating a suspected drug dealer. He has a few priors, so you know he's a real scum ball.
You've had him under surveillance for a few weeks and have been following him to an house that's been converted into an apartment and suspect that's his stash house. You don't know exactly what apartment he's renting, but get a warrant guessing he's in apartment #2. I don't know where this incident occurred, but speaking for myself, I have never worked in a judicial jurisdiction where I could have ever gotten a warrant based upon a "guess," and I have sure as hell never sworn to an affidavit for a search warrant containing information I knew was not factual! You follow him into the common area of the apartment that has a locked door with a no trespassing sign and didn't knock or announce. Not to be difficult, but if there is a locked door, how did I get in? Did the suspect let me in not knowing I'm a cop? Did another resident allow me in? Is it a "common area" where guests, utility workers, and members of the general public are expected to go when seeking to meet or contact a resident in the building? Did I break the door down (which will destroy my whole case right there...)? You see he goes into apartment #5. Instead of having the warrant updated to reflect the proper apartment number, you execute the warrant on apartment #5 and find drugs stashed in the apartment. Again, not to be difficult, but why wouldn't I simply call the judge and update the information on the warrant? It won't take more than a few minutes, and preserves the integrity of my case.
During the trial when the defense attorney asks why you followed him into the common area when the sign said no trespassing, your partner says that he thinks that sign doesn't apply to law enforcement. Well, under certain circumstances, he might be right. In the description given, I don't have enough information to know if one of those circumstances exist in this case or not.
The judge is also sworn to uphold the constitution, but he doesn't seem to have an issue with the officers executing the warrant on the wrong apartment, nor that fact that they ignored a no trespass sign without knocking an announcing was an issue. Really poor judge. He must enjoy getting overturned on appeal!
You can say the drug dealer got what he deserved, another scum bag is off the street. But at what price? Not worth my integrity unless I do it correctly.
BTW, this wasn't a hypothetical and there were other 4th amendment transgressions such as taking a cell phone from someone who wasn't under arrest, with no warrant, searching through that cell phone to get information that was used to get the search warrant. Again the judge couldn't be trifled with such matters.
I'm sure some out there will conveniently label me as a cop hater, leftist etc. I've never been arrested, never been hassled by a cop, and hold cops in high regard for the tremendous challenges and dangers they face performing their job. I simply consider the Constitution and Bill of Rights as one of the finest documents written by man and one worth holding everyone who is sworn to protect up to that high standard. Nothing you've said here would cause me to label you as a cop hater, and as far as the Constitution, I agree.
I grew up believing that Cops are our friends. I still hold that belief, despite repeatedly seeing quite a few who are nothing but jerks, to put it mildly. I've seen officers go way out of their way to help people out many times, but I've also seen quite a few who are Cartman with a badge, thinking since they're cops, we must all bow and "respect their authoritah".
LEOs have got to start self policing their ranks. Lotta bad press these days, with officers standing by watching antifa assault people in Charlottesville and other incidents. Being told to stand down does not relieve you of a duty. I understand there's no law requiring you to stop an assault, but it seems to me that your pride in yourself and your work would be more important than being disciplined for stepping in. I was informed as a soldier that you've got to follow orders. I was also informed that following illegal orders does not clear you of wrongdoing.
Another story just surfaced of a cop manhandling and arresting an ER nurse who refused to give him a blood test on a patient without a court order. I'm sure we've all seen that video of the Baltimore cop with the kid on a skateboard.
I think LEOs need to do a little better job of policing their own ranks. Crap like the last two are not to be tolerated in a free country. 7mm
Only a few incidents that were more than "most cops are azzholes" should be proof enough that there is less police corruption than ever before. Anytime the police engage in any sort of use of force there are a dozen people with camera phones hoping to catch that pig brutalizing that nice mugger, plus the car cams and now the body cams, and all you can come up with is a few examples out of the tens of thousands of contacts made each day? If this is your case that cops are getting worse you have a really weak case.
99% of Cops are good till ya fu-k with em, not listening to them is fu-kin with em!
Exactly what is wrong....
My entire life I have held LEO in the highest regards. I still want to. It's hard to... I knew this would touch some wrong, much like asking a Catholic priest about child molestation. Bad juju....
If nothing else I have seen who the true professionals of their trade are. I truly admire you. OTOH The ones toting the line have shown their colors. That is fine as it shows the ratio even among this fine group of souls. Mission accomplished.
Thanks to the good guys who informed us and educated those who will listen. Shame on the ones who think their authority gives them higher ground.
One who sees a fellow officer speeding and looks the other way is is of weak conscience and is undeserving to have such authority.
If that's the standard then they're all corrupt because I've never seen a cop that didn't speed with impunity, none of them pay any attention to speed limits.
The navy base in the town 40 miles from my house has a counter drug academy that trains regional police in drug tactics. The school lets out on a Friday afternoon so the cops are driving home then. Not long ago on the interstate near my house I was passed by a Louisiana cop car headed south doing well over 100 mph, I'm pretty sure he was going home from the counter drug academy training. He certainly wasn't in pursuit of someone because he wasn't even in his own state, but he felt he could drive 100 mph plus on a Mississippi interstate because he knew he'd never be cited for it, professional courtesy.
Is that corruption? I think it is but I'd guess most police officers wouldn't consider it such because they virtually all do it and are never held accountable. It's just become accepted as a perk of the job to be able to ignore traffic laws.
I've never had a bad experience with a LEO. I've gotten tickets, sure, but I earned them. I've also experienced discretion, for which I was grateful. When my son was little I would walk him up to a LEO (like when we were at the fair or other event) and tell him if he needed help find someone like this guy, it's his job to keep you safe.
The problem isn't the number of bad LEOs, it's the impact they have and the publicity they get. The impact is tremendous and the publicity is disproportionate.
99% of Cops are good till ya fu-k with em, not listening to them is fu-kin with em!
Exactly what is wrong....
My entire life I have held LEO in the highest regards. I still want to. It's hard to... I knew this would touch some wrong, much like asking a Catholic priest about child molestation. Bad juju....
If nothing else I have seen who the true professionals of their trade are. I truly admire you. OTOH The ones toting the line have shown their colors. That is fine as it shows the ratio even among this fine group of souls. Mission accomplished.
Thanks to the good guys who informed us and educated those who will listen. Shame on the ones who think their authority gives them higher ground.
It would be nice if we could get LEO to answer the simple question of, "Do you consider the 4th amendment of the constitution as an impediment to conducting your work, or an essential right that trumps the added effort for you to show probable cause and get a judge to grant you a warrant"
To me that's the gold standard of good cop / bad cop. I'd venture to say if we could use that litmus test, issues of comply or be tazed, cops that never back down when challenged, etc., would for the most part go away as if by magic.
That's not difficult to answer at all. I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution, and that document, as well as each amendment therein, contains individual rights that are absolutely essential to each and every member in society. The extra time and effort to obtain a search warrant has never been an impediment to doing my job...
The added bonus, if I've had a warrant signed by a judge, it generally saves a lot of time later dealing with various motions and hearings in court regarding the validity of a search.
Chris
Let's give a hypothetical that maybe isn't as cut and dry.
You and your partner have been investigating a suspected drug dealer. He has a few priors, so you know he's a real scum ball.
You've had him under surveillance for a few weeks and have been following him to an house that's been converted into an apartment and suspect that's his stash house. You don't know exactly what apartment he's renting, but get a warrant guessing he's in apartment #2. You follow him into the common area of the apartment that has a locked door with a no trespassing sign and didn't knock or announce. You see he goes into apartment #5. Instead of having the warrant updated to reflect the proper apartment number, you execute the warrant on apartment #5 and find drugs stashed in the apartment.
During the trial when the defense attorney asks why you followed him into the common area when the sign said no trespassing, your partner says that he thinks that sign doesn't apply to law enforcement.
The judge is also sworn to uphold the constitution, but he doesn't seem to have an issue with the officers executing the warrant on the wrong apartment, nor that fact that they ignored a no trespass sign without knocking an announcing was an issue.
You can say the drug dealer got what he deserved, another scum bag is off the street. But at what price?
BTW, this wasn't a hypothetical and there were other 4th amendment transgressions such as taking a cell phone from someone who wasn't under arrest, with no warrant, searching through that cell phone to get information that was used to get the search warrant. Again the judge couldn't be trifled with such matters.
I'm sure some out there will conveniently label me as a cop hater, leftist etc. I've never been arrested, never been hassled by a cop, and hold cops in high regard for the tremendous challenges and dangers they face performing their job. I simply consider the Constitution and Bill of Rights as one of the finest documents written by man and one worth holding everyone who is sworn to protect up to that high standard.
I don't know what year this took place but cell phones (like any new technology) were a bit of an unguided gray area for some time.
Let's give a hypothetical that maybe isn't as cut and dry.
You and your partner have been investigating a suspected drug dealer. He has a few priors, so you know he's a real scum ball.
You've had him under surveillance for a few weeks and have been following him to an house that's been converted into an apartment and suspect that's his stash house. You don't know exactly what apartment he's renting, but get a warrant guessing he's in apartment #2. I don't know where this incident occurred, but speaking for myself, I have never worked in a judicial jurisdiction where I could have ever gotten a warrant based upon a "guess," and I have sure as hell never sworn to an affidavit for a search warrant containing information I knew was not factual! You follow him into the common area of the apartment that has a locked door with a no trespassing sign and didn't knock or announce. Not to be difficult, but if there is a locked door, how did I get in? Did the suspect let me in not knowing I'm a cop? Did another resident allow me in? Is it a "common area" where guests, utility workers, and members of the general public are expected to go when seeking to meet or contact a resident in the building? Did I break the door down (which will destroy my whole case right there...)? You see he goes into apartment #5. Instead of having the warrant updated to reflect the proper apartment number, you execute the warrant on apartment #5 and find drugs stashed in the apartment. Again, not to be difficult, but why wouldn't I simply call the judge and update the information on the warrant? It won't take more than a few minutes, and preserves the integrity of my case.
During the trial when the defense attorney asks why you followed him into the common area when the sign said no trespassing, your partner says that he thinks that sign doesn't apply to law enforcement. Well, under certain circumstances, he might be right. In the description given, I don't have enough information to know if one of those circumstances exist in this case or not.
The judge is also sworn to uphold the constitution, but he doesn't seem to have an issue with the officers executing the warrant on the wrong apartment, nor that fact that they ignored a no trespass sign without knocking an announcing was an issue. Really poor judge. He must enjoy getting overturned on appeal!
You can say the drug dealer got what he deserved, another scum bag is off the street. But at what price? Not worth my integrity unless I do it correctly.
BTW, this wasn't a hypothetical and there were other 4th amendment transgressions such as taking a cell phone from someone who wasn't under arrest, with no warrant, searching through that cell phone to get information that was used to get the search warrant. Again the judge couldn't be trifled with such matters.
I'm sure some out there will conveniently label me as a cop hater, leftist etc. I've never been arrested, never been hassled by a cop, and hold cops in high regard for the tremendous challenges and dangers they face performing their job. I simply consider the Constitution and Bill of Rights as one of the finest documents written by man and one worth holding everyone who is sworn to protect up to that high standard. Nothing you've said here would cause me to label you as a cop hater, and as far as the Constitution, I agree.
This was in Anchorage, when the suspect unlocked the door to the common area the troopers followed the suspect before the door closed.
It would be nice if we could get LEO to answer the simple question of, "Do you consider the 4th amendment of the constitution as an impediment to conducting your work, or an essential right that trumps the added effort for you to show probable cause and get a judge to grant you a warrant"
To me that's the gold standard of good cop / bad cop. I'd venture to say if we could use that litmus test, issues of comply or be tazed, cops that never back down when challenged, etc., would for the most part go away as if by magic.
That's not difficult to answer at all. I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution, and that document, as well as each amendment therein, contains individual rights that are absolutely essential to each and every member in society. The extra time and effort to obtain a search warrant has never been an impediment to doing my job...
The added bonus, if I've had a warrant signed by a judge, it generally saves a lot of time later dealing with various motions and hearings in court regarding the validity of a search.
Chris
Let's give a hypothetical that maybe isn't as cut and dry.
You and your partner have been investigating a suspected drug dealer. He has a few priors, so you know he's a real scum ball.
You've had him under surveillance for a few weeks and have been following him to an house that's been converted into an apartment and suspect that's his stash house. You don't know exactly what apartment he's renting, but get a warrant guessing he's in apartment #2. You follow him into the common area of the apartment that has a locked door with a no trespassing sign and didn't knock or announce. You see he goes into apartment #5. Instead of having the warrant updated to reflect the proper apartment number, you execute the warrant on apartment #5 and find drugs stashed in the apartment.
During the trial when the defense attorney asks why you followed him into the common area when the sign said no trespassing, your partner says that he thinks that sign doesn't apply to law enforcement.
The judge is also sworn to uphold the constitution, but he doesn't seem to have an issue with the officers executing the warrant on the wrong apartment, nor that fact that they ignored a no trespass sign without knocking an announcing was an issue.
You can say the drug dealer got what he deserved, another scum bag is off the street. But at what price?
BTW, this wasn't a hypothetical and there were other 4th amendment transgressions such as taking a cell phone from someone who wasn't under arrest, with no warrant, searching through that cell phone to get information that was used to get the search warrant. Again the judge couldn't be trifled with such matters.
I'm sure some out there will conveniently label me as a cop hater, leftist etc. I've never been arrested, never been hassled by a cop, and hold cops in high regard for the tremendous challenges and dangers they face performing their job. I simply consider the Constitution and Bill of Rights as one of the finest documents written by man and one worth holding everyone who is sworn to protect up to that high standard.
I don't know what year this took place but cell phones (like any new technology) were a bit of an unguided gray area for some time.
I expressed my opinion. I don't work in New York City and never will. How things are there, I couldn't say. I'm amazed that you would consider me corrupt because someone else had a different view. That's OK, I don't value your opinion either, Harry.
If you don't realize the thin blue line is as real as the sun rising in the east then indeed the system has corrupted you. And your answer smacks of the smarmy contempt public employees have for the general public these days. Fake and corrupt scam public employee unions breeds that attitude in spades.
This [bleep] goes all the way to the top.
Just look at what the FBI has done to protect Hillsry and what the DOJ is doing to protect the FBI(Comey).
What about all the hundreds of cops that tossed their oath out the window, stood down and allowed rioters to beat people over the head with bike locks, destroy private and public property and disrupt otherwise peaceful protesting. All because their BOSS told them to.
We are not talking about a few bad apples or a percentage, we are talking the entire department from the bottom to the top.
My guess is since cops are people the 20-60-20 rules apply
20%. Salt of the earth, we are lucky to have them
60%. Middle of the road, good days, bad days, decent enough people just doing a sometimes very hard job
Bottom 20%. Brrrr honeycomb, they're mainly why these threads get started. Some slip thru the recruiting process and disguise their lust for power well enough to get a badge and gun. They're azzhole cops and azzhole people, most of us have run into one of them and it sucks
What amazes me is that more of the 60% don't fall into the bottom 20%
I swear I don't know how these folks do what they do day after day. I don't have the temperament for it. I'm grateful for the 80% that do it well.
I find the 20/60/20 rule to be pretty accurate any time you're discussing groups of people
My guess is since cops are people the 20-60-20 rules apply
20%. Salt of the earth, we are lucky to have them
60%. Middle of the road, good days, bad days, decent enough people just doing a sometimes very hard job
Bottom 20%. Brrrr honeycomb, they're mainly why these threads get started. Some slip thru the recruiting process and disguise their lust for power well enough to get a badge and gun. They're azzhole cops and azzhole people, most of us have run into one of them and it sucks
What amazes me is that more of the 60% don't fall into the bottom 20%
I swear I don't know how these folks do what they do day after day. I don't have the temperament for it. I'm grateful for the 80% that do it well.
I find the 20/60/20 rule to be pretty accurate any time you're discussing groups of people
What you have to understand is that nobody is either good or bad. The same guy who will risk his life to save a kid from a house fire might look the other way when the chief's son gets caught with an underage girl.The same guy that would give you CPR and save your life in a wreck might tune you up if he had to run you down during a meth raid. Cops are just people and it would take a real saint to be all good all the time.
I don't think that there are many truly bad cops. Jerks, plenty. As much of their job consists of roadside revenue, of course they leave a foul taste. But there are a million cops in this country, cameras everywhere, a radical media that loves nothing more than to tear down a white authority figure, and even with all of that these pig-assaults-nurse stories aren't a daily thing. That's doing awfully well in my book.
That said, the invariable progression of these stories wherein the department closes ranks around their bad apple and none of the other officers at the scene ever saw anything until the video leaks to the news three nights later leads me to conclude that there aren't that many truly good cops either.
APD: "Yes the arrest is on your record, but most people interested in your background give you an opportunity to explain what happened as far as the charges being dropped. Most businesses ask "have you ever been convicted", not "have you ever been arrested". Those who do ask about the "arrest" vs. the "conviction" should allow for proof of no adjudication and use that as the basis for hiring or not." You are sadly misinformed. In my profession a yes answer to arrest on an application means you will never have an interview. In your profession will a potential candidate get an interview if he was arrested?
APD: "Yes the arrest is on your record, but most people interested in your background give you an opportunity to explain what happened as far as the charges being dropped. Most businesses ask "have you ever been convicted", not "have you ever been arrested". Those who do ask about the "arrest" vs. the "conviction" should allow for proof of no adjudication and use that as the basis for hiring or not." You are sadly misinformed. In my profession a yes answer to arrest on an application means you will never have an interview. In your profession will a potential candidate get an interview if he was arrested?
Bob, the same in my profession, but every application I have see also has a place for "Explanation". Didn't say they would use the explanation, I said they "Should" use that as a basis. As an employer, if I were sorting through applications, I would use that arrest record to weed out candidates, but, after 26 years in LE, I also know that not all arrests are what they seem on the face. Maybe I'm just too reasonable.
"most people interested in your background give you an opportunity to explain what happened as far as the charges being dropped" No they don't. Say yes to being arrested and your application ends up in the round file without an opportunity to explain regardless of what you put in the "Explanation" block. Hypothetically, lets say that nurse in Utah is awarded a modest settlement and being a caring individual decides she can positively influence more lives by being a nurse practitioner or a nurse anesthesiologist.Thanks to Officer Bully she can now afford to take some time off work and pay the tuition. However, she has to say yes to ever been arrested? Because there are 100 applications for each seat in those programs she could be Florence Nightingale but she is not going to school. A real example. A ghetto playground and 2 middle school kids are shooting hoops. Suddenly a caravan of unmarked Crown Vics rolls up, doors fly open and out come a bunch of cops with 12 gauges. No AR-15s or body armor because it was not invented yet. With my face planted in the brick wall I was making the most convincing argument I could that we were just shooting hoops as the other officers searched the window wells for our stash or other drug paraphernalia. Fortunately no dopers had recently left anything there. By the grace of God nothing was found in the window wells and it was not Sargent Bully asking the questions with an "arrest them all and let the prosecutor sort them out" patrol philosophy or my life would have been totally different. Ed, I bet you can look back on your childhood and had you run into the wrong officer you would not have been afforded the opportunity to serve in the profession you have so obviously dedicated your professional life to.
A welders welds fail = Fired A plumbers joints leak = Fired A Doctors surgery fails = Fired A cops tickets are dismissed = Keeps his job and bennies.
A cop decides the wrong way--whether due to bad light, distraction, incompetence, corruption, or whatever else = somebody is injured, maimed for life, or dead.
I figure the ratio is about the same as it is among the U.S. citizenry. About 10% are just sorry, about40% don't give a crap about anything but themselves, and the other half are decent folks. The bad ones get all the press.
Nah, I don't think that holds up.
In general, jobs in the productive sector attract people who can do them well, because people who can't do them well tend not to advance in them, or even to get fired from them. Consider a welder who can't weld well, or a cashier who can't resist stealing money, or a doctor who can't be bothered to keep up with the latest pharmaceuticals. They'll all lose their jobs to competitors who do those jobs better; so the would-be welder might choose instead to be a guitarist, the would-be cashier a housekeeper, etc.
But where jobs in the parasitic sector are concerned, there's a definite moral hazard that doesn't exist in the productive sector where the coercive power that comes with a particular job attracts precisely the sort of people who shouldn't have it, and the lack of competition makes it easy for them to stay.
For example, corrections officers. You should want to be a corrections officer because you want to help people get their lives back together, and because you want to be a line of defense against the worst of the worst in society. But you'll also want to be a corrections officer if you simply enjoy bullying people, tormenting them, and beating them up without having to worry about retribution. I'm here to tell you that in real life there are plenty of corrections officers at both ends of that scale, and that's not going to change anytime soon, because the way the system is designed keeps it like that.
Or politicians. You should want to be a politician because...heck, I don't know. I can't think of a decent reason why anyone would want to be a politician. But there are plenty of corrupt reasons why people want to be politicians, and as we all know the number of decent politicians--if that number even exists--is dwarfed into insignificance by the number of corrupt politicians.
The same is true of cops. There are good reasons to be a cop, and there are really bad reasons to be a cop, and plenty of people are cops for both kinds of reasons, and the system doesn't differentiate between them. As long as they're good enforcers for the State, they'll keep their jobs.
So no, I don't think the ratio of bad to good is the same in the parasitic sector as it is in the productive sector: I think it pretty much has to be much, much higher.
Or politicians. You should want to be a politician because...heck, I don't know. I can't think of a decent reason why anyone would want to be a politician. But there are plenty of corrupt reasons why people want to be politicians, and as we all know the number of decent politicians--if that number even exists--is dwarfed into insignificance by the number of corrupt politicians.
Recently I have been thinking of getting into politics and try to protect myself from the Left. My wife told me, "They would crucify you. You're too honest and say what's on your mind. That's not tolerated."
Fix the police by--among other things--national gun registration?
Nah, not for me. My solution is different, and simpler.
Privatize the police. Take 'em out of the parasitic sector and put 'em into the productive sector, where the competitive free market will work on them like it works on everybody else.
A welders welds fail = Fired A plumbers joints leak = Fired A Doctors surgery fails = Fired A cops tickets are dismissed = Keeps his job and bennies.
A cop decides the wrong way--whether due to bad light, distraction, incompetence, corruption, or whatever else = somebody is injured, maimed for life, or dead.
A mechanic who installs a tie-rod incorrectly, a welder who welds a trailer hitch wrong or a trucker who drives with an unsecured load will all be prosecuted to the fullest extent if they make a mistake in their profession and very likely lose much or all of what they own. They are all expected to do their job correctly and professionally EVERY time. My business liability insurance is outrageous for those reasons. When LE screws up they get some paid time off while taxpayers foot the bill.
There is a difference between a mistake and malicious intent. Mistakes happen and upon hindsight most could have been avoided. Sheet happens. When a professional intentionally, for whatever reason, does harm to another person or property while performing their job, they should be run out while tarred and feathered. Professionals are considered professionals for a reason. They are expected to be far above and beyond Joe Blow while performing their duties. Public servants should not get a pass.
A welders welds fail = Fired A plumbers joints leak = Fired A Doctors surgery fails = Fired A cops tickets are dismissed = Keeps his job and bennies.
A cop decides the wrong way--whether due to bad light, distraction, incompetence, corruption, or whatever else = somebody is injured, maimed for life, or dead.
A mechanic who installs a tie-rod incorrectly, a welder who welds a trailer hitch wrong or a trucker who drives with an unsecured load will all be prosecuted to the fullest extent if they make a mistake in their profession and very likely lose much or all of what they own. They are all expected to do their job correctly and professionally EVERY time. My business liability insurance is outrageous for those reasons. When LE screws up they get some paid time off while taxpayers foot the bill.
There is a difference between a mistake and malicious intent. Mistakes happen and upon hindsight most could have been avoided. Sheet happens. When a professional intentionally, for whatever reason, does harm to another person or property while performing their job, they should be run out while tarred and feathered. Professionals are considered professionals for a reason. They are expected to be far above and beyond Joe Blow while performing their duties. Public servants should not get a pass.
I politely ask you to enlighten me. Please jazz it up a little as I am a huge fan of your humor. Make me the butt if you wish as I will understand. Seriously.
One kind really just wants to be left alone and wants to leave others alone.
The second kind wants to change things by directing people when he is not their employer. In fact, he ( supposedly) works for the public he is interfering with.
If you are not nosey you probably won't make a good cop.
It's pretty common for cops to take on a "supervisory role" and start bossing people who don't need a boss.
Guys who opt for a career in Law Enforcement are wired differently than the rest of us. It might make them better, but too often it makes them worse.
Of course, they have no way of knowing they are wired differently, but it's why they hang out with other cops socially as well as at work.
Many of them think they are elite, but they're really just different.
I figure the ratio is about the same as it is among the U.S. citizenry. About 10% are just sorry, about40% don't give a crap about anything but themselves, and the other half are decent folks. The bad ones get all the press.
Well of course that is a non starter however it's nothing new, most police want a disarmed public.
Hmm...my information says different. Perhaps you can post a link that shows the result of the survey that indicates most police want the public unarmed.
Well of course that is a non starter however it's nothing new, most police want a disarmed public.
Hmm...my information says different. Perhaps you can post a link that shows the result of the survey that indicates most police want the public unarmed.
Originally Posted by curdog4570
There are basically two kinds of people.
One kind really just wants to be left alone and wants to leave others alone.
The second kind wants to change things by directing people when he is not their employer. In fact, he ( supposedly) works for the public he is interfering with.
If you are not nosey you probably won't make a good cop.
It's pretty common for cops to take on a "supervisory role" and start bossing people who don't need a boss.
Guys who opt for a career in Law Enforcement are wired differently than the rest of us. It might make them better, but too often it makes them worse.
Of course, they have no way of knowing they are wired differently, but it's why they hang out with other cops socially as well as at work.
Many of them think they are elite, but they're really just different.
You're as stupid as you were when you joined the board. You don't like cops - everyone gets it. But don't try and explain very complex social behavior with your 3rd grade education.
APD: "Yes the arrest is on your record, but most people interested in your background give you an opportunity to explain what happened as far as the charges being dropped. Most businesses ask "have you ever been convicted", not "have you ever been arrested". Those who do ask about the "arrest" vs. the "conviction" should allow for proof of no adjudication and use that as the basis for hiring or not." You are sadly misinformed. In my profession a yes answer to arrest on an application means you will never have an interview. In your profession will a potential candidate get an interview if he was arrested?
Bob, the same in my profession, but every application I have see also has a place for "Explanation". Didn't say they would use the explanation, I said they "Should" use that as a basis. As an employer, if I were sorting through applications, I would use that arrest record to weed out candidates, but, after 26 years in LE, I also know that not all arrests are what they seem on the face. Maybe I'm just too reasonable.
Ed
Studies of employment applications show this is not the case. Just having an arrest show up on your background check,even if charges were dismissed or a person was found not guilty can decrease their LIFETIME income by 20%. this is becoming worse with the increased use of automated resume sorting.
Every-time a cop wrongly arrest a person they are significantly impairing their potential income, and more cops need to be held accountable for the damages incurred.
APD: "Yes the arrest is on your record, but most people interested in your background give you an opportunity to explain what happened as far as the charges being dropped. Most businesses ask "have you ever been convicted", not "have you ever been arrested". Those who do ask about the "arrest" vs. the "conviction" should allow for proof of no adjudication and use that as the basis for hiring or not." You are sadly misinformed. In my profession a yes answer to arrest on an application means you will never have an interview. In your profession will a potential candidate get an interview if he was arrested?
Bob, the same in my profession, but every application I have see also has a place for "Explanation". Didn't say they would use the explanation, I said they "Should" use that as a basis. As an employer, if I were sorting through applications, I would use that arrest record to weed out candidates, but, after 26 years in LE, I also know that not all arrests are what they seem on the face. Maybe I'm just too reasonable.
Ed
Studies of employment applications show this is not the case. Just having an arrest show up on your background check,even if charges were dismissed or a person was found not guilty can decrease their LIFETIME income by 20%. this is becoming worse with the increased use of automated resume sorting.
Every-time a cop wrongly arrest a person they are significantly impairing their potential income, and more cops need to be held accountable for the damages incurred.
It is a huge deal and I often ask where is the accountability.
Yes there are ways to protect our civil liberties for huge screw-ups but what about the little things like an arrest? Some LE have said it is better to error on the side of safety so arrest now and ask questions later but what if overturned arrests went on their record?
Yes it's a tough job but you chose it and there are tougher jobs out there so son't jump on that soapbox. There needs to be some sort of checks and balances. I don't have the answers hence the reason for the thread. A badge does not create a hero but a hero can really make a badge shine.
I figure the ratio is about the same as it is among the U.S. citizenry. About 10% are just sorry, about40% don't give a crap about anything but themselves, and the other half are decent folks. The bad ones get all the press.
I'll go with this one....but what do I know.
if it's no better then a random sample of U.S citizenry, then your hiring practices suck and you need to pick up your game...
Just for the sake of the few that don't understand how things work....I make an arrest based on probable cause. The next step is to take the individual before a Magistrate. I then have to explain to the Magistrate the facts of my case and my probable cause to support the arrest. This is all under oath. You better have your ducks in a row, or the Magistrate will decline to issue an arrest warrant. In which case you will find your self taking the person back where you got them from and telling them that you're very sorry. Civil suit to follow. With felony arrests the case will also include a preliminary hearing followed by a grand jury indictment, if the facts of the case support it. Only then do you face a trial which requires proving guilt, beyond a reasonable doubt. Sometimes mistakes are made. There is a process for exspunging an improper arrest.
if it's no better then a random sample of U.S citizenry, then your hiring practices suck and you need to pick up your game...
Oh Lord I could rant on with this one. Most hiring, around here anyway, have been horribly politically driven. The city must have more * (insert special class here) officers to satisfy the political winds.
Sometime it can be a reasonable special consideration; such as if you a large and growing X community it might be a good idea to hire more X officers, especially if there are significant language, custom, and racial features. You may lucky and get great people. But sometimes in the rush to satisfy a quota a few less than stellar ones get through the screening process.
So, yes, Antelope Sniper, a lot of civilian hiring practices suck.
if it's no better then a random sample of U.S citizenry, then your hiring practices suck and you need to pick up your game...
Oh Lord I could rant on with this one. Most hiring, around here anyway, have been horribly politically driven. The city must have more * (insert special class here) officers to satisfy the political winds.
Sometime it can be a reasonable special consideration; such as if you a large and growing X community it might be a good idea to hire more X officers, especially if there are significant language, custom, and racial features. You may lucky and get great people. But sometimes in the rush to satisfy a quota a few less than stellar ones get through the screening process.
So, yes, Antelope Sniper, a lot of civilian hiring practices suck.
Don't get me started on training.
RG,
Sorry to hear that. However, upon reflection, I really shouldn't be surprised. Around here, many of the cops are real bullies, and many of those fit into the (insert special status here) category. There's also seem to be a few too many who fit into the "stupid bully' category. Ask them a question requiring more then two brain cells and they default to threatening to arrest you.
In this state the respect for LEO's is further degraded by some of the idiotic laws passed by our lawmakers, think magazine bans etc. As a result, if you are a non-fud member of the shooting community in this state, all LEO's must be held with some level of suspicion. The fault for this may lie with the politicians, but that doesn't change the level of damage done to the level of trust the shooting community hold for those nominally tasked with enforcing these laws.
There is a process for exspunging an improper arrest.
Unfortunately the time and cost isn't paid for by the person making the mistakes.
The last time I was given a ticket it took me three days of missed work and lots of miles to get it dismissed. If I would have hired an attorney it would have been at my expense. I'm out time and money, cop is getting paid to lie under oath and the public is getting hosed for wasted tax payer money. At the end of it all the cop gets his butt chewed by the judge and the judge apologized to me right in the courtroom but no other repercussions at all.
White Bear, I'm pretty sure that there is very little that I can say that you'd be satisfied with. It's clear to me that you've been victimized by the police and chances are good that you'll never get past it. Now, if in fact a cop lied under oath as you allege, it should be easy to prove. On my department that would be grounds for immediate dismissal. Period! It's called General Order Number 1. If you ever lie about anything and it's proven you're gone, immediately. Our integrity and credibility is valued way above any one officer. Everyone knows it. Doesn't matter what the lie involves, it's the fact that you did it. You're gone! I'm pretty sure most departments are similar. If the officer lied and was called on it in court by the Judge, nothing he says going forward can be trusted. The district attorney/ prosecutor would never put an officer on the stand with a history of lying. I suggest you ensure that this information is known publicly and discuss it at minimum with the agency involved. Or, you could just complain about it here.
...Studies of employment applications show this is not the case. Just having an arrest show up on your background check,even if charges were dismissed or a person was found not guilty can decrease their LIFETIME income by 20%. this is becoming worse with the increased use of automated resume sorting.
Every-time a cop wrongly arrest a person they are significantly impairing their potential income, and more cops need to be held accountable for the damages incurred.
I stand corrected and am glad I was in the employment lines at a time when things weren't always like this.
As to bobmar's comment about my youth and not having encountered a crooked cop and the subsequent effect on my career, it is true.
When I was young and stupid, I was not saint, by a long shot, just fortunate to not get caught. Perhaps that's why I have tried to be fair throughout my career.
As I used to teach Academy students, they possess more power over the average citizen than even the President. They can kill with their weapons, or they can destroy someone's life and their families life with their pen. It's a tremendous responsibility, particularly when a PD gives it to people with little life experience.
White Bear, I'm pretty sure that there is very little that I can say that you'd be satisfied with. It's clear to me that you've been victimized by the police and chances are good that you'll never get past it. Now, if in fact a cop lied under oath as you allege, it should be easy to prove. On my department that would be grounds for immediate dismissal. Period! It's called General Order Number 1. If you ever lie about anything and it's proven you're gone, immediately. Our integrity and credibility is valued way above any one officer. Everyone knows it. Doesn't matter what the lie involves, it's the fact that you did it. You're gone! I'm pretty pretty sure most departments are similar. If the officer lied and was called on it in court by the Judge, nothing he says going forward can be trusted. The district attorney/ presecutor would never put an officer on the stand with a history of lying. I suggest you ensure that this information is known publicly and discuss it at minimum with the agency involved. Or, you could just complain about it here.
Naw Bobmar, I'm not one to hold a grudge. I let things go and usually too easily. Myself being "victimized" ( I never thought of it that way) is long gone and I can laugh about it now. I have no worries or fears in this world. Many people can't say that. My post wasn't a cry for compassion from others rather a request for information. I see too many people pushed around by authority figures because of lack of information on both sides.
GON 1..... I wish... If you read the end of my original post you can see the examples I used. Little to no consequences. I have no axe to grind. Many of us here on the CF complain about crooked politicians although they all cant be bad. I guess this falls into the same category for me.
Maybe we need a pitt bull thread to cool things off for our resident LE. . .Edit to add that I have some very close friends and family that are LEO. I also very much respect the good cops on here.
...Studies of employment applications show this is not the case. Just having an arrest show up on your background check,even if charges were dismissed or a person was found not guilty can decrease their LIFETIME income by 20%. this is becoming worse with the increased use of automated resume sorting.
Every-time a cop wrongly arrest a person they are significantly impairing their potential income, and more cops need to be held accountable for the damages incurred.
I stand corrected and am glad I was in the employment lines at a time when things weren't always like this.
As to bobmar's comment about my youth and not having encountered a crooked cop and the subsequent effect on my career, it is true.
When I was young and stupid, I was not saint, by a long shot, just fortunate to not get caught. Perhaps that's why I have tried to be fair throughout my career.
As I used to teach Academy students, they possess more power over the average citizen than even the President. They can kill with their weapons, or they can destroy someone's life and their families life with their pen. It's a tremendous responsibility, particularly when a PD gives it to people with little life experience.
Ed
Ed,
It's nice to hear from the cops who "get it". I think you hit on one of the great conundrums of police work. It required the body of a young man, but the wisdom of someone much older.
I think you hit on one of the great conundrums of police work. It required the body of a young man, but the wisdom of someone much older.
Sniper, I couldn't agree more with that statement. I became a cop as a second career. I had been in the Coast Guard for 26 years and was in my mid 40's. I had learned a lot about dealing with people and difficult situations in my first career. It made dealing with those issues as a cop, much easier. It was experience and wisdom my younger counterparts didn't have. It wasn't their fault but you can only learn so much in 25-30 years. I don't know if I could have done the job at that age. I certainly didn't have the patience then that I do now. There's a lot to be said for youth though and it is a young mans job, physically. On my 50th birthday, I did 50 pushups, 50 sit-ups and ran 5 miles in 40 minutes. I've done it on my birthday every year since. I figure as long as I can keep that up, I'm ok. But there's no way I want to be on the street beyond 60. By then, I'm pretty sure I will have had enough.
I never made an arrest that I did not have Probable Cause to make. I preferred to present my case to the state's attorney and let them decide if I had enough Probable Cause to make an arrest. I really don't understand you guys who say you were arrested for something you didn't do, and they (LE) let you go. So then you would indeed have an arrest on your Criminal History. Off to the side of the arrest the result would be given (convicted - 10 yrs, conviction probation 10 - years) or nothing meaning the case was dropped.[i][/i] If you were falsely imprisoned that is one hell of a lawsuit you could file. Included in the damages are court costs, attorney fees and money lost being away from your job. In my career as a Law Enforcement Officer I found that most attorneys that worked in the defensive criminal system automatically assumed LE Officers lied on the stand. (They call it testilying). As a Law Enforcement Officer, once caught on the stand committing perjury, your career as a cop was done. A cop's integrity is the centerpiece of his/her existence as a cop. Once your integrity is lost because you were caught lying on the stand the state can never again use you to present evidence or testify to anything, because the defense attorney's next question would be "Officer, you were convicted of perjury on (date), is that not correct? Then why should anyone in here believe anything you have to say?" Seriously guys, as rampant you may think police corruption is today, it is NOTHING like it was before continuous supervisory presence in the form of the car cams and your body cam, and the dozens of phones that pop out as soon as the police begin to do anything official, from a traffic stop to raiding a Meth lab. News stations pay big money for recordings of a police officer abusing his/her authority - the worse the officer violated his/her oath the more the recording is worth.
Seriously guys, as rampant you may think police corruption is today, it is NOTHING like it was before continuous supervisory presence in the form of the car cams and your body cam, and the dozens of phones that pop out as soon as the police begin to do anything official, from a traffic stop to raiding a Meth lab. News stations pay big money for recordings of a police officer abusing his/her authority - the worse the officer violated his/her oath the more the recording is worth.
Myself, I wouldn't call it rampant. I do believe from personal experience that an individual needs to know their rights and exercise them when necessary. Maybe that's the Libertarian in me.... I have not bashed cops on here. I have praised the good honest LEO. If anyone is offended by my statements, maybe it's time for a little self-reflection.
...If anyone is offended by my statements, maybe it's time for a little self-reflection.
OK, I'm offended and, to make up for it, I need to shake your hand, buy you a cold beverage of your choice, and figure out how you're going to compensate for my being offended.
Seriously, I get it that there are bad cops, I get it that bad things happen to good people that could have, should have been prevented, but weren't. The vast majority of cops want to see the corruption and brutality eliminated just as much as the non-LEO's do, if not more.
It makes it exponentially harder for a good cop to do his job when the public doesn't trust them or just outright hates them. We cannot do our jobs without help from the citizens we serve.
To have some bozo like that Utah cop violate the nurse's rights and then his supervisor backs him up, makes every cops job tougher, even those who don't work in that state. This thread is a perfect example of that.
One poster, maybe in this thread, said that it's time to stop this Gestapo crap. Yes, it's wrong, yes he screwed the pooch as did his supervisor, but the Gestapo would not have waited for the nurse to go through all of the hoops, nor would they have waited for anything. Either the blood would have been drawn as soon as they walked through the door or someone would go to jail after having the crap beat out of them.
It's bad, it should have never happened but it's not Gestapo tactics. People have no idea what life is really like under a despotic government. No need to exaggerate like hormonal teenagers.
...If anyone is offended by my statements, maybe it's time for a little self-reflection.
OK, I'm offended and, to make up for it, I need to shake your hand, buy you a cold beverage of your choice, and figure out how you're going to compensate for my being offended.
Ed. To a gentleman and true professional as yourself I would accept that beverage and hand shake but don't think that you would ever get ahead on the count. I will and have put my life on the line for good people. You are on my list. Good day sir.
