A lot of people who want to become police officers are irresponsible jerks who are drawn in because they think they get to beat people up with truncheons, and shoot them with guns. There are really good police officers(ie, the resource officer at my junior high.) who are there to help people. Other people just want power.
Post
I have no idea what you're talking about, and I'm talking about Greece.
Well, I turned to say something to him about respect when an older gentleman came up and knocked him to the ground with a nice little wooden cane. This was the boy's grandpa. He had the boy appologize to me, then walked him over to the Recruiting display, explain what he did, and apologize to the rest of the soldiers.
Well, apparently the boy's Gaffer was in the Army during the Big War. He was one of those who landed at Normandy and decided to stay in after the war ended. He retired shortly after Korea.
It is the blood of patriots that allow others to sleep well at night.
No, true patriotism is loving your country like your wife or husband. You don't let anyone put them down or come between you, but when your loved one goes wrong you disagree with love and show them the way back.
And, Volund, that kid deserved it. We ask the National Guard to do the impossible with substandard equipment and support for no clear reason and with no end in sight. That they are still willing to answer the call makes them heroes.
It's the ones who gave the orders who need to be held accountable.
Patriot=Idiot in my book
QFT. History has taught us time and time again that nationalism is a dangerous idea that creates artificial boundaries in the world. I personally reject any kind of overt nationalism such as singing the national anthem, flying flags and supporting politicians using nationalistic fear to start meaningless wars.
And also the police are thugs.
I have no idea what you're talking about, and I'm talking about Greece.
Basically people are drawn to police work for 3 main reasons.
1) Genuine desire to help people.
2) Power and Authority(arresting people and such)
3) Beating people up legally.
People also tend to remember bad things people do to them and mistakes they make, totally forgetting good people helping them, and anything they succeeded on. So if you meet some police who are police because they have a genuine desire to help people you will probably forget them. If you see police attack someone or flaunt their power it will be remembered.
So basically, to the opening poster. Some of the policeman want to stand between you and thugs. Others want to be able to beat you up without being arrested at the slightest provocation.
QFT. History has taught us time and time again that nationalism is a dangerous idea that creates artificial boundaries in the world. I personally reject any kind of overt nationalism such as singing the national anthem, flying flags and supporting politicians using nationalistic fear to start meaningless wars.
And also the police are thugs.
Exactly, I'm just too tired to actually explain exactly my thoughts, but jimbo said it very good. I agree with him.
Nowadays I don't think that policen (wo)men and members of the army, navy and air force get the appreciation that they deserve. These people are the only thing that stands between you, and people that wanna kick your ass. [/mini-rant]
I see this argument over and over again by older people. Kids do this, kids do that. But the fact is older people are also at fault. The general attitude that older people including many teachers etc. give young people is that they are hopeless, they are pieces of crap etc. There is no support for young people. The way it is supposed to go is: older people support the younger, the younger people respect the older people. But the older generation has largely abandoned the younger generation. Kids who are abused at home, have problems can expect no sympathy from the average person on the street or even most teachers , even though there are government organizations for such things. If kids walk down the street, they are suspected to be thieves, criminals etc. If the older generation (baby boomers) has abandoned their share of the responsibility, why whould we uphold ours. I was a law-abiding, respectful kid in high school and I remember people on buses telling students off on buses, calling the police on students who were just talking in the street, ignoring me when I offered old people my seat (they just assumed I wouldn't give it to them and turned around), glaring at me when I don't offer middle aged people my seat (they're still young enough to stand, saying I must offer them my seat because I was younger is bullying) etc.
In the old days teachers and parents were harsher but there was also more support. Nowadays teachers just come to cash their check (mostly) and have given up on younger people, there are huge amounts of abuse going on to younger people, a skyrocketing rate of suicide. Kids are living in broken homes or are living as latchkey kids with no support. With the baffling decision by the baby boomers not to subsidize tertiary education (even though it was subsidized for them by the WWII generation) many kids are living below the poverty line just to attend uni, literally starving.The only thing you hear middle aged people on TV saying are that kids are selfish, they're getting more violent etc. Fact is, life is a lot tougher for kids now than in the 70s. There are a lot less jobs, more competition etc. Youth crime rates are actually DOWN from the 70s/80s/90s. Baby boomers will not have the guts to intervene if a young person is being harassed or abused by a psychopatic person or criminal in public. But the moment a young person vandalizes something, baby boomers will come rushing in to catch them and call the police, like a knight in shining armour. Well, if a young woman is being harassed maybe they would intervene, as it would be a good opportunity to show off about how brave they are. But if a young man were being bashed or robbed, baby boomers would be hiding behind a bench.
Remember how 'appreciative' young people in the 60s (now baby booomers) were to the soldiers who returned to the airports. I don't think the soldiers 'appreciated' being called baby-killers or being spat on. And infact there are a lot of kids now who do involve themselves in patriotic activities or support the troops. But the media isn't interested in GOOD stories.
There are some young people who are violent, stupid, unethical, yes. And I hate them. But you can say the same thing for all ages of people. But I see baby boomers losing goodwill for the young, and how can they expect goodwill back? Hating the young people (the future) is a miserable thing, it is like hating life and your own species.
“Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it.”
“Patriotism is a pernicious, psychopathic form of idiocy.”
-George Bernard Shaw
“Heroism on command, senseless brutality, deplorable love-of-country stance, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism — how passionately I hate them!”-Albert Einstein
Basically people are drawn to police work for 3 main reasons.
1) Genuine desire to help people.
2) Power and Authority(arresting people and such)
3) Beating people up legally.
People also tend to remember bad things people do to them and mistakes they make, totally forgetting good people helping them, and anything they succeeded on. So if you meet some police who are police because they have a genuine desire to help people you will probably forget them. If you see police attack someone or flaunt their power it will be remembered.
So basically, to the opening poster. Some of the policeman want to stand between you and thugs. Others want to be able to beat you up without being arrested at the slightest provocation.
Believe me, I always remember those that do good things, but here most police officers join the police for 2, 3 or because they have fascistic tendencies, It will be irrational to think that there are no police officers that join for 1, but they are far and between.
Most jails here are full of junkies instead of actual criminals
Most areas (especially the poorer ones) have very few officers patrolling the streets because they are used to protect those in power (not their fault though).
It's the ones who gave the orders who need to be held accountable.
I am a firm believer in the Roman method... if a senator votes for war, then they lead he troops.
Oh, and police are only thugs until you actually need them, then they are nowhere to be found.
I see this argument over and over again by older people. Kids do this, kids do that. But the fact is older people are also at fault. The general attitude that older people including many teachers etc. give young people is that they are hopeless, they are pieces of crap etc. There is no support for young people. The way it is supposed to go is: older people support the younger, the younger people respect the older people. But the older generation has largely abandoned the younger generation. Kids who are abused at home, have problems can expect no sympathy from the average person on the street or even most teachers , even though there are government organizations for such things. If kids walk down the street, they are suspected to be thieves, criminals etc. If the older generation (baby boomers) has abandoned their share of the responsibility, why whould we uphold ours. I was a law-abiding, respectful kid in high school and I remember people on buses telling students off on buses, calling the police on students who were just talking in the street, ignoring me when I offered old people my seat (they just assumed I wouldn't give it to them and turned around), glaring at me when I don't offer middle aged people my seat (they're still young enough to stand, saying I must offer them my seat because I was younger is bullying) etc.
Yeah. I'm still in highschool in some cases its ridiculous. The suicide rate is also starting to effect people younger an younger more often.
Stuff.
Thank you.
Hardly anybody sticks up for young people.
It's actually kind of funny. When I'm at work, (selling vegetables on a market stall. It's only a summer job before I go to university.) people are perfectly lovely and polite to me the vast majority of the time.
When I'm walking around town, wandering in and out of shops and the like, exactly the same people give me filthy looks as if I'm about to mug them.
I can't help the fact that I haven't been walking the Earth as long as you.
They think we're all stupid as well.
.And also the police are thugs.
Well, I am. Sometimes it's hard to get my coworkers psyched up into nihilistic violence, but I keep trying. Nothing worse than a pansy cop not ready to beat someone up at random.
A fair amount are stupid.
So are a fair amount of everyone else.
Its also that people are more willing to generalize about teenagers. For instance, yesterday I was at a theater. There were about 6 teenagers there, two of which were being kind of annoying, and talking. Some faculty person then came up and started telling all 6 of us that we were being really disruptive.
Nowadays I don't think that policen (wo)men and members of the army, navy and air force get the appreciation that they deserve.
Here's some of the appreciation that policemen deserve.
"Well you think you know what terror is
As it stares from the newspaper page
And of course you all know what horror is
It's the rage of the age
Intimidation doesn't have a focus
It oozes from every pore
Murder doesn't bother to whisper
In this f---ing town it roars
Bodies awash in back bayous
Bibles all full of holes
Kill a captive to capture a criminal
Badges where there ought to be souls (x3)
Well I'd like to be smug and self-righteous
And talk about courts setting criminals free
Buy me a nice little home near Conroe
Where the neighbors are just like me
But everytime I see the uniform
I realize I've had the luck
To only read about their latest deeds
And miss a fascist mindf---
Duck when you see 'em coming
Cause the badge means you suck
A black man just back from 'Nam
People thought he was a little bit odd
Jogged at night to calm his nerves
Always talking about God
Well a black man running in the evening
To a cop is a n----- crook
They had two loaded revolvers
Milton had just one book
But he didn't have a chance to convert them
Cause they wouldn't take a second look
It took 8 shots to stop Milton Glover
And his god---- holy book
Duck when you see 'em coming
Cause the badge means you suck
Sprinkle bodies with throw down revolvers
Cover court transcripts with s---
And if by chance you get found guilty
You'll still get away with it
The men who killed Joe Torres
Never went to jail
The sniper who picked off Carl Hampton
Never paid any bail
The killers of Milton Glover
They might be pulling you over tonight
And if you happen to get shot
Well I guess you started the fight (x3)
Bodies awash in back bayous
Bibles all full of holes
Kill a captive to capture a criminal
Badges where there ought to be souls
Well there's too much counterfeit money
I don't need to pass no buck
Gonna coin me a new slogan
The badge means you suck
The badges means you're f-----
The badge means you suck"
- AK-47, "The badge means you suck"
"Although the police are . . . a repressive institution that operates to contain the poor and powerless, they are themselves exploited, not only by miserable working conditions and social isolation but also as instruments of laws and policies which they neither control nor benefit from. The police protect private property but do not own it; as guardians of the peace, they defend government policies of imperialism and racism but do not derive any significant benefit from them; and in their repression of popular movements, the police legitimize a political order which they did not create."
- The Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove: An Analysis of the U.S. Police
Joy Division, "They walked in line"
Behind Enemy Lines, "The Global Cannibal"
World Burns to Death, "Boiling Human Blood"
Seriously though, I've had two uncles who were RCMP officers, both during the 70's. Both dealt with problems ranging from civil disturbances to problems with local chapters of organized crime groups. Both were the first to tell me that, yes there were some cops who were not exactly model officers, but there are also guys out there that daily put their life on the line to ensure that people like you and I are safe.
As for the military, while I may not agree with the reasons for why our government deploy soldiers into some areas, I support fully the people in military service. These people have earned their respect and I give it willingly.
And for those who want to dispute these facts and argue or demean the police and military personnel just remember that these people you are deriding are the same ones that are offering their lives to give you that right to do so.
Thank God I live in Canada...
Oh sure, Canadian police, RCMP, bunch of boy scouts...
Our motto here in Quebec is "I remember". Well I remember what the police did to my distant family who were in the Asbestos miner strikes, or what the RCMP did when they used the clowns from the FLQ as an excuse to raid lawful organisations like unions and left-wing groups.
Really, though, I love the irony when someone talks about cops as though we're pretty much all the same guy (and this perception reaches, not only across geographical boundaries, but through time as well), while decrying our prejudice. It's just too precious.
Well, it's back to the road for me. Someone's got to be the Man and keep everyone down.
You guys are so cute when you rage against the machine.
Really, though, I love the irony when someone talks about cops as though we're pretty much all the same guy (and this perception reaches, not only across geographical boundaries, but through time as well), while decrying our prejudice. It's just too precious.
Well, it's back to the road for me. Someone's got to be the Man and keep everyone down.
I have nothing but respect to those police who are out there to actually keep the peace. Don't feel bad about the adolescent views of most of this thread.
The truth is, people remember the bad and forget the good. I'm sure Divine_Hammer could probably tell us stories about some pretty BAD police officers if he was so inclined. But I'm sure he has stories about some really GOOD police officers too.
In the end, police officers are just like everybody else, some good, some bad. I've only ever had one police officer treat me with anything less than respect. Against the many who have been nice to me, even while writing me a ticket for speeding.
In the end, police officers are just like everybody else, some good, some bad. I've only ever had one police officer treat me with anything less than respect. Against the many who have been nice to me, even while writing me a ticket for speeding.
A police department is pretty much a reflection of its society. It doesn't exist in a vacuum, apart from its community. If you live in a city with a corrupt municipal government, that's likely to trickle down to street cops in some way.
Beyond that, a lot of the negative, stereotyped view of cops comes from the fact that most people have no idea what we're actually doing and how we're supposed to be doing it.
First, as far as the kids these days go, it's a myth that suicide is a problem primarily of teenagers. Check out this chart from the New York Times.
Note that teenagers and preteens actually have the lowest overall suicide rate. Also, while the percentage change in suicide rates for preteens seems very large, in terms of actual increase it is 1/27th that of people 45 to 54.
Meanwhile, the rate of teens committing violent crime is down, the rate of teen drug use has remained still after a long period of decline, and the rate of teen pregnancy has dropped like a rock.
In other words, kids today are positively angelic compared to their parents when they were that age. Some of this probably has to do with their being so darn busy all the time, but my hat's still off to 'em.
Second, on the topic of law enforcement and military personnel, I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, I have a long history of being hassled by school disciplinary officers, police, and military recruiters. While all of these were pretty minor incidents, they have a certain way of building up animosity. On the other hand, said people have dangerous, thankless jobs, and deserve some credit for preventing a takeover by bandit kings or hostile foreign nations. It'd be great if authority figures could spend more time fixing actual problems and less time combating imaginary menaces for the benefit of aging suburbanites who are scared of everything, but I give them my grudging respect.
And for those who want to dispute these facts and argue or demean the police and military personnel just remember that these people you are deriding are the same ones that are offering their lives to give you that right to do so.
Keep telling yourself that if you believe it. But if we take the last 50 years, no Iraqi or North Vietnamese person ever tried to take away your freedom. You're far more likely to be put in jail, and then its your own government who has taken your freedom.
But whatever... maybe we should have no politics and religion in this forum as its obviously going to get heated.
A police department is pretty much a reflection of its society. It doesn't exist in a vacuum, apart from its community. If you live in a city with a corrupt municipal government, that's likely to trickle down to street cops in some way.
Definitely. That said, there is going to be a mix in the department. Some police officers will be total jackasses, others will be good people who really want to help people and protect them.
Don't like America, go live somewhere else and get an appreciation for how the rest of the world has to live. Mugabe(sp?) would love to hear your opinion on this I'm sure.
Don't like America, go live somewhere else and get an appreciation for how the rest of the world has to live. Mugabe(sp?) would love to hear your opinion on this I'm sure.
I don't live in America, I live in the UK and our politicians are your little b*tches. And I've lived in America (Sacramento) and I like America, no more or less than the other countries I've lived in. But seriously this imperialistic stance many countries have adopted is causing more problems than it solves.
And also if Mugabe is such a scary dictator like Saddam why don't the thugs of the world (USA and UK) go deal with it?
Definitely. That said, there is going to be a mix in the department. Some police officers will be total jackasses, others will be good people who really want to help people and protect them.
Kind of. Depends on the general attitude around the department (or precinct). I work for a department that's pretty self-policing. If someone's got the wrong approach to the job, we typically get the situation dealt with long before it becomes an issue out in the public. Ethical tolerances are pretty tight in my neck of the woods, too.
Of course, when someone talks about "bad" cops, I never know if they mean guys who are actually committing civil rights violations, or guys who are doing the normal thing.
For example, when I tell you that you're under arrest and that you need to turn around and put your hands out to the side? That's an excellent time to turn around and put your hands out to the side. It's not a good time to put your hands where I can't see them, or to ball them up into fists and start quoting William Kunstler or Saul Alinsky. Many people have a hard time understanding that the cops are taking the situation pretty seriously, even if they aren't.
And I've lived in America (Sacramento) and I like America...
You lived in Sac and still like America? Wow, and I thought We were a little weird on the wrong side of the pond...
Seriously, for every twenty good cops, there is that one bad one that gets video taped for being bad. Even then, I have seen good cops get painted in a bad light for doing their job as they are supposed to...
Case in point the taser incident in the UC Berkely library. The student was asked to leave by the librarian because he was speaking to loudly. He told her to go [deleted] herself. Well, she called the police as she was supposed to.
They showed up, asked him to leave. He said no that it was a free country and he was free to stay there. Well, the ended up having to take him into custody, but he fought them. He was holding onto the desk and refused to move. The police had two options, hit him or tase him... they tased him.
At this point, every cell camera started shooting video of the "police brutality." Everyone started crowding and yelling police brutality because the guy "wasn't doing anything." Well, the police tried to stand him up to get him out, but he refused. Because of the crowd, the police couldn't pick him up because it would have left their back exposed (standard operating procedure). The guy refused to comply, so they tased him again.
Look it up on youtube. The fact that the guy was refusing to comply with lawful orders meant he could be arrested. It is called trespassing, even public libraries can do it.
Most of the cops have a bum rap when it comes to the stereotype. But that is just my opinion. I am just a hippie-beating baby-killer... I mean an Army National Guardsman.
You lived in Sac and still like America? Wow, and I thought We were a little weird on the wrong side of the pond.
Sorry to go off-topic, but I liked Sacramento - it was quite a calm place, and a massive change of pace from London. And if I needed to party I went to San Francisco, Lake Tahoe, even LA and Vegas. I had good times there (my uncle lives there).
But back to the topic, yeah I don't want to upset anyone, but I have had a couple of bad experiences with the Police when I have been innocent and that has (understandably) colored my perception of the police. No disrespect to the policeman on this thread, he plays D&D, he must be a good guy. Its just some police think they're in The Departed or something. But enough of that.
Its just some police think they're in The Departed or something. But enough of that.
Some cops are badge-heavy; some are brutal.
But a lot of incidents of "police brutality" are completely by the book. And being innocent isn't a guarantee that the police will never talk to you or suspect you of something. I've been stopped or detained myself a few times. Sadly, our names don't appear over our heads and turn red when we're guilty of something, so cops have to ask questions.
Typically, it's nothing personal.
Unless it's your friend or one of your children, then you act like they did something really bad and give them a small ticket just to screw with them, right?
No! I would never--all right, sometimes I put funny parking cites on my friends' cars when I see them parked around town. I know the feeling when you walk toward your car and see the cite under the windshield wiper. They're usually so glad to see "Parking a POS like this in an otherwise God-fearing town" under the Offense section that they usually forget to hit me when they find me.
But a lot of incidents of "police brutality" are completely by the book.
Hmm yeah, that's sort of the problem right there.
Respecting cops? Eh.
Respecting soldiers? Never.
Hmm yeah, that's sort of the problem right there.
Exactly, some citizens do not understand the authority policemen have and think themselves above it. When they do, erroneous claims of brutality do tend to come about.
Respecting soldiers? Never.
Any particular reason?
Any particular reason?
Anyone whose job is to kill his brothers (or sisters) deserves no respect. I can respect them as people, but never as soldiers.
Exactly, some citizens do not understand the authority policemen have and think themselves above it. .
* Fourth Amendment – Protection from unreasonable search and seizure.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
* Fifth Amendment – due process, double jeopardy, self-incrimination, eminent domain.
No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
* Sixth Amendment – Trial by jury and rights of the accused; Confrontation Clause, speedy trial, public trial, right to counsel
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.
* Eighth Amendment – Prohibition of excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
If citizens believe that they don't have to blindly submit to the authority of a law enforcement officer on his unsupported word, there may be a reason.
Anyone whose job is to kill his brothers (or sisters) deserves no respect. I can respect them as people, but never as soldiers.
Interesting. It is a job that has to be done, though. I respect them, in part, because they do that job for me. And, my father, uncle, grandfather and several friends were soldiers (or Marines). I respect them as men and soldiers both. I can't agree with your assessment of the job, but as it is a characterization of a job and not of a person, I can be comfortable with it.
If citizens believe that they don't have to blindly submit to the authority of a law enforcement officer on his unsupported word, there may be a reason.
Fourth: Cops are not permitted to perform unlawful searches. That's why they are deemed unlawful.
Fifth: Cops don't hold people answerable for anything. They bring in a suspect and let the courts decide.
Sixth: Cops don't prosecute anyone. They also cannot interrogate you if you wish for a lawyer.
Eigth: Cops do not assign bail or mete out punishment.
None of these apply to the job of a police officer. Mayhap the misinterpretation leads to the false conclusion of an iniquity? Cops are agents of the Executive branch of government. Here we have quotes from expectations for the Judicial branch.
The Constitution is very clear on the restrictions that law enforcement has. I do not see similar passages regarding our Constitutional duty to cooperate with and obey law enforcement.
None of these apply to the job of a police officer. Mayhap the misinterpretation leads to the false conclusion of an iniquity? Cops are agents of the Executive branch of government. Here we have quotes from expectations for the Judicial branch.
Okay, here you lost me - I don't see where the Bill of Rights is only supposed to apply to the judicial branch.
Please explain. If they only apply to the Judicial branch, and the police are part of the Executive branch, what restrictions apply to the Executive branch, then? Can the Executive Branch detain someone indefinitely, use force to compel testimony, or deprive someone of property without due process legally, according to the Constitution? And if so, where in the Constitution does it say this?
And re: your objections to my citing the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments, I have two words in response:
Jose Padilla.
Okay, here you lost me - I don't see where the Bill of Rights is only supposed to apply to the judicial branch.
Please explain. If they only apply to the Judicial branch, and the police are part of the Executive branch, what restrictions apply to the Executive branch, then? Can the Executive Branch detain someone indefinitely, use force to compel testimony, or deprive someone of property without due process legally, according to the Constitution? And if so, where in the Constitution does it say this?
The citations listed apply to the Judicial branch. As I stated, it is not within a police officer's purview to set bail, mete punishment, etc. They do not apply to an officer arresting a suspect. The application of the Bill of Rights here is that of the citizen and his rights in a court of law. It has nothing to do with a citizen's rights when being arrested for suspicion of commiting a crime.
In regard to the questions: No, they cannot detain someone indefinitely, use force to compel testimony or deprive someone of property without due process. Those that do are criminals themselves. Being aware of your rights is a good thing. Assuming that because you are suspected of a crime by a police officer your rights are somehow being violated leads to trouble. I'm not talking about back woods old school "tune 'em up" cops. I'm talking about law abiding law enforcers. The ones that do follow due process. What we tend to see from some, however, is that any attempt to follow said process is impeded at every possible step. A cop has a job to bring you in. While you're held, you're still considered innocent. The process is just beginning. If you fight it because you think it's somehow removing your rights (which it may be - part of the process, again, unfortunately) then the cop can use whatever legal means to bring you in. He has authority. If you deny it, you risk yourself. And let's not forget that you also put the officer in danger. He has to have that power. If he does not, how can he enforce anything? Again, I'm not talking about an abuse of this power.
I also understand that the system as is has plenty of issues of it's own. That's not something I'm discussing, either.
And re: your objections to my citing the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments, I have two words in response:
Jose Padilla.
I can assume you mean the guy convicted of aiding terrorists. If so, how does his case apply to cops? I think you're confusing the debate. I'm talking about police officers, not Bush's right to designate people as enemy combatants. And Mr Padilla's petition for a writ of habeas corpus named Rumsfeld as the respondant. Last I checked, Rummy wasn't the arresting officer. Or even the jailor. Again, I'm talking about a cop arresting you. Not what the courts, Secretary of Defense or President of the United States do to you after you have been arrested.
No, you did not. You did say, however, that many citizens do not understand the aurhority that law enforcement has, and I grant that this may be correct. I submit to you that, in many cases, law envorcement does not understand the authority that citizens have over them as well.
The Constitution is very clear on the restrictions that law enforcement has. I do not see similar passages regarding our Constitutional duty to cooperate with and obey law enforcement.
The Constitution is most decidedly not very clear on the limitations of law enforcement. It makes some general points very forcefully. The specifics are worked out through ever-evolving case law, much of which contradicts itself in different courts and different times. The definition of an "unreasonable search", for example, seems to change as often as the wind's direction.
What doesn't change is the nature of police authority. It's always an outgrowth of public authority, i.e., governmental authority. The Supreme Court recognizes this again and again. So, when I tell you you're under arrest, you're under arrest. Your political opinions don't matter; in fact, the weakness of my case doesn't matter, at least not at that moment.
In short: a situation with cops is not the right time to debate the violence inherent in the system. It's a time to keep your hands visible and to do what you're told, though not necessarily what you're asked. That's an enormous difference, right there. That's not me talking, it's the Supreme Court.
In short: a situation with cops is not the right time to debate the violence inherent in the system. It's a time to keep your hands visible and to do what you're told, though not necessarily what you're asked. .
Precisely. But, given the lessons of the past eight years, please don't take it personally if all I say is "Am I under arrest?" and "I want a lawyer."
And I'm doing it not because I may agree with whether or not your search and arrest is valid, but because you have a gun and getting shot hurts.
And ZB (can I call you ZB?) my point in bringing up Jose is that that can be done to any one of us, at any time, for any reason. He obeyed his captors and asked for a lawyer, and it got him six years in a military brig - where he may or may not have been tortured - as people debated, with all seriousness, whether an American citizen arrested on American soil deserved to have a trial because of the magic word terrorism. By the time he had his trial, which was not for the charges he was originally detained for, he was unable to assist in his defense.
That should scare the hell out of anyone. If you'll forgive the tinfoil, perhaps that was its purpose.
And ZB (can I call you ZB?) my point in bringing up Jose is that that can be done to any one of us, at any time, for any reason. He obeyed his captors and asked for a lawyer, and it got him six years in a military brig - where he may or may not have been tortured - as people debated, with all seriousness, whether an American citizen arrested on American soil deserved to have a trial because of the magic word terrorism. By the time he had his trial, which was not for the charges he was originally detained for, he was unable to assist in his defense.
That should scare the hell out of anyone. If you'll forgive the tinfoil, perhaps that was its purpose.
Anyone that argues in a passionate way, as you have, and yet maintains respect, civility and coherence can call me ZB. ;) So, of course! At any rate, I understand what you're getting at. We were looking at two different things is all. I'm not completely sure how I feel about what happened to Jose and what could happen to any of us (though incredibly unlikely). On one side, I myself consider terrorists and those that aid them enemy combatants. And I do believe that this can help. Since we're no longer permitted to make war in a way that can win it, we need some sort of deterrent. A deterrent, here, is keeping the bad guys put away for as long as possible. It's more expensive than killing them, but it does somewhat the same thing. I have no pity for those that would make war against civilians in my country. I am a civilian myself. On the other hand, I'm pretty damned against a police state. And policies like this, when left alone, can most assuredly turn into exactly that. There really isn't any balance to be had, either. Either we trust our government in it's abuses to keep those abuses targeted against our enemies and not to bring them against the people or we don't allow them at all. I know what side you're on. And I'm not positive that tinfoil isn't something we need nowadays myself. ;)
On the first, initial newspaper reaction was mixed, until it turned out he was mentally ill, after which it mostly turned against the police. As someone with sciziophrenia (Under control with the help of the niiice pills
), I'm firmly on the side of the police. If I someday charge some cops from thirty feet away with a meat-cleaver, I have no real complaints about getting shot. I can cover thirty feet in about 4 seconds.Second was a guy in a parking lot at nighttime - Can't recall how it started, but he decided it would be a good idea to point a cell phone at some cops and pretend it was a gun.
Apparently, police officers should wait to confirm that an object that resembles a gun (Remember, bad lighting) is a gun, potentially getting shot and dead, just so that people who play jokes that anyone should know can and probably will turn deadly can feel secure.
I'm sorry, but if it looks like a weapon and you're treating it like a weapon, any reasonable person is well within their rights to assume it's weapon and act accordingly - And that includes shooting you, if the danger seems great enough.
No, I'm not a cop.
Patriotism is knowing your country is worth protecting. I know my country is worth protecting. And I have nothing but respect for those brave souls who stand up to protect it.
Interesting. It is a job that has to be done, though. I respect them, in part, because they do that job for me. And, my father, uncle, grandfather and several friends were soldiers (or Marines). I respect them as men and soldiers both. I can't agree with your assessment of the job, but as it is a characterization of a job and not of a person, I can be comfortable with it.
My grandfather fought for the independence of Finland. While I'm anti-patriotism, I sort of appreciate him for doing it (although it could've been interesting to be in the Soviet Union when it collapsed), but I can't respect him for it. I also haven't an ounce of respect for him as a person, but that's a different matter entirely.
My grandfather fought for the independence of Finland. While I'm anti-patriotism, I sort of appreciate him for doing it (although it could've been interesting to be in the Soviet Union when it collapsed), but I can't respect him for it. I also haven't an ounce of respect for him as a person, but that's a different matter entirely.
War is brutal hell.
Not being willing to go to war if nessasary is worse.
I would feel more patriotic, but we have a color chart that determines how much terror we should have. It's still there isn't it?
And still, unsurprisingly, on yellow.
“You'll never have a quiet world till you knock the patriotism out of the human race.”
“Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it.”
“Patriotism is a pernicious, psychopathic form of idiocy.”
-George Bernard Shaw
“Heroism on command, senseless brutality, deplorable love-of-country stance, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism — how passionately I hate them!”-Albert Einstein
I don't think patriotism is what this country should seek to eliminate....
Perhaps it isn't the people in the trenches who should be vilified like this but rather the people in power that made the decision to put those people into a situation that required combat?
And as for the police I find it funny that the same people that object so strenuously about them are the ones that call 911 when they've been robbed or assaulted.
But anyways, that's just my opinion. I'm merely sharing it and not trying to influence yours or push mine upon you. And though I've read some well thought out responses and replies in this thread, I still haven't seen anything of a convincing enough nature to make me believe that the organization of a law enforcement agency is a bad idea, nor that we should not respect the people who would work to uphold such an ideal for the betterment of the public trust.
Cheers.
Not being willing to go to war if nessasary is worse.
I just believe war isn't necessary. It is the absolute worst way to solve any problem. Unfortunately, humanity is still too stupid to live without war.
No matter how necessary one thinks war is, a soldier is still someone who (at least in the west) willingly murders his brothers and sisters, often including civilians (at least in modern warfare). How could I respect someone like that?
So how would you defend against someone going to war against you?
So how would you defend against someone going to war against you?
Depends on the attacker, but mostly by surrendering.
'Assyrians'.
...Look up the mongol invasion. Granted, an extreme example, but there's worse ones.
'Assyrians'.
I can't speak for other people (even myself) in other times. The only people I can see invading Finland in this day and age are the Russians, so surrendering is the only option I am currently seriously contemplating.
How about this one - People join the military, not to murder, but because they believe in sacrificing themselves - Their lives, their choice, their moral high ground - So other people will be safe.
Your life was quite literally bought, through sacrifices of your ancestors, by people like that.
Your life was quite literally bought, through sacrifices of your ancestors, by people like that.
The only war in recent history that I know about where one side was a true threat WW2. And even in that one I wouldn't've fought, because Finland was allied with the Nazis.
Unfortunately, too many places like that have the type you seem to fear.
Depends on the attacker, but mostly by surrendering.
Huh, would of sworn you were French, not Finnish...
Huh, would of sworn you were French, not Finnish...
Not French, just pacifist, at least in the modern age of warfare when most of the people slaughtered by soldiers are civilians.
But just like D&D is a ruleset based on exceptions, so is mine. I'm not inflexible about these things, but I do have a "default setting," and that's "No respect for killers."