For the police officers of America, is the media your real enemy ?
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago
0Most of Americans support you , trust the job that you do and support the process in which you do it !
Up to about eighty percent of us, [ 80%,] depending on race , economics , political leanings , age , etc. . So ; keep up the good work !
It must be amazingly disappointing at times to listen to our mass media , One might get the impression that America despises a good part of what you do . A greater part of our news media loves the controversy implied by their own general mishandling of facts , news articles and dialog .
One really has to wonder , that if there is a general dislike of police in certain groups of Americans perhaps it is a cultured distrust- in fact BECAUSE of media ! Let's face it the media is fast becoming untrustworthy to most intelligent Americans , with the present agenda sensationalisms dominate almost every news article posted these days .
Anyone here believe the American media will ever become ethically, morally , politically centered ?Just like history, people tend to pick up the interesting parts. Media delivers what people expect from them. If people didn't expect to see the 'interesting' part, media might have remained silent. They're looking for money. It's difficult to make money displeasing customers.
They can't! They are bought by the corporations to report what their handlers want them too. Nothing more, nothing less.
Really? Prove it. If you're lucky, you'll find one out of a million. The rest are regular human beings who try to do good work and hold onto their self respect, like everyone else.
Feel free to admit what you do for a living, and I'm sure someone can come up with an insulting generalization that has no basis in reality.
As a professional journalist of 35 years, I have to say that this post is both offensive and highly uninformed. And I am restraining myself.
I am moderate to conservative (voted for Reagan both times), and I can tell you from working with hundreds of journalists that they are dedicated to doing their best to provide objective reporting.
It's the people who talk to the reporters who have the biases and often lie through their teeth to get their way -- and in many cases intimidate, manipulate and even threaten with injury or death.
I have not worked with a single one who was ever bribed, caved in to a corporate interest or lied on purpose. I have been in many meetings that erupted into shouting matches over the accuracy of a single word in a proposed story.
Conservatives are dedicated to spreading such falsehoods because they want an end to democracy -- of which media is an essential part -- and bring on a republic controlled by a ruling class. And they are getting pretty close to reaching their goal.
Sorry I must be part of the 20%. I have no trust or respect for police at this moment. When a man with his hands raised is shot by police officers, who don't bother to check if he is dead or alive, then drag him around for no apparent reason. I'm suspicious as heck.
I'm simply shocked and amazed that so many are so willing to turn a blind eye to the police brutality that is being documented daily. I promise if it happens to you I will be just as shocked and amazed as I am when it is happening to others.
I find it ludicrous that a cop shot in Illinois results in a massive man hunt, but a civilian shot in Texas under very, very suspicious circumstances gets paid leave for the perpetrators. Maybe cops just kill so they can have an extra holiday.Yeah, thats it.
Shoot to kill ...
Or be the shot,
Life's the only thing we've got,
But,
"The only ones who know it:
are us!" …
NOT!
The good guys are bad guys;
That's the way it seems.
But, Anarchy, O Anarchy
Its only in your dreams.Well, if we don't start being fair and honest about the injustice in our system we will be looking at anarchy. Violence is never the answer, but until all police officers are required to wear body cameras we will continue to see this wanton disregard for the laws we are expected to abide by; yet the police appear to get a free pass to commit murder at will.
" the police appear to get a free pass to commit murder at will"
Don't know where you live, but they don't around here. Or anywhere else I have had experience with. ANY time there is a police shooting it is well investigated and, if guilty of murder, the cop is charged and tried.
No free pass, in other words. While I don't actually doubt there are a few locations where it is done, they are certainly a small minority. Generalizing from a tiny handful to the whole bowl isn't a very good practice.Sounds to me as if you are generalizing in order to minimize the damage done when those who are supposed to uphold the law choose to break it.
I don't see a lot of evidence of police officers being held to the same level of accountability as the rest of us.
I'm sure if you view the video of the murder in Texas you will have some spin on it that sounds nice to you. I don't see how anyone can spin murder into something palatable." the police appear to get a free pass to commit murder at will" <Live to Learn>
"While I don't actually doubt there are a few locations where it is done, they are certainly a small minority. " <Wilderness>
Who is generalizing?
No, cops are not held to the same accountability as you and I. We may not kill except in self defense while there are situations where a cop is supposed to pull the trigger. Of course, you and I are not charged with protecting the public, either.
And which murder in Texas?You should google it. The video was taken by someone in a car a street away. The details are still coming out, but the point is that the guy had his hands in the air and was not in close proximity to the officers. He was not in a position which could reasonably be assumed to be life threatening to either officer. Even if he had been in possession of a gun, his hands were in the air and he was not pointing it at anyone. The officer just shot him. His hands were in the air. And then....they did nothing. They just stood there. Didn't bother to see if the guy was dead or wounded. They just stood there. And then, after a few moments one drug him around like a dead animal and then walked away. It was disgusting. There can be no explanation for that video.
Yes the guy apparently had done something pretty crappy. He was probably a poor reflection of a human being, by what they had responded to. But, they are not judge and jury and their actions are far removed from anything I would be proud to say was a part of our justice system. Paid leave. That's what they got while it is being looked into. They should be incarcerated like anyone else until they can post bail if it was even allowed.
The point is that if we don't have justice for all we have no justice at all. It's just a pretty facade. It works out OK for people like us. For now.OK - I googled "murder in Texas". I got a movie, a newspaper site and a blurb about somebody killing a cop. I don't think any of these are the specific murder you refer to.
But wait a minute. You say "murder" then go on to talk about a case where apparently no one has even been charged, let alone found guilty of the legal crime of murder. You DO know that definition I trust - and that it does not depend on someone across the country watching an internet video of someone being shot and declaring that a cop is automatically guilty of murder? It does not depend on an unknown someone taking the faux name of "Live to Learn" being judge and jury all wrapped into one.
"Justice" - again I assume that you understand that "justice" does not depend on some guy on the net deciding who is to be jailed, charged or convicted based on a video he watched? That there is just a little more to it than that - that there is a DA and a judge involved at a minimum?More than a brilliant question.
I will strive to answer it in my own mind.Justice is when we actually bring people to trial to determine if they are guilty of a crime. Not when we allow some 'internal investigation' to gloss over abhorrent behavior patterns which result in death or injury to others.
Interesting that you couldn't google this. I got one on the first try.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015 … /71511908/
To boot....both officers had tasers on them; although one was malfunctioning."I'm sure if you view the video of the murder in Texas you will have some spin on it that sounds nice to you."
"Justice is when we actually bring people to trial"
Can you reconcile those two statements of yours for me? One indicates a crime took place, without ever having a trial to know if it actually did, one requires a trial. The can you indicate just how you know that an internal investigation glossed over anything at all (your unsupported opinion without knowing anything at all about such an investigation does not count)?
And finally, "justice" does not mean taking innocent people to trial or even jailing them temporarily. People we know will not be convicted of anything illegal. "Justice" means punishment of guilty people, not simply punishing anyone you think did wrong.
You want to be making that decision, become a DA. Though I shudder to think of any cop in your jurisdiction - anyone that declares MURDER! based on an internet video should never be placed in such a position.Well, people are innocent until proven guilty. But, that video is pretty damning. If there is an explanation everyone is guaranteed their day in court so they can certainly share that.
My statement about internal investigations glossing over things did not apply to this case. They have just started the internal investigation. With FBI oversight. We'll have to wait and see how that one turns out.
And, I would hate to be a citizen in your jurisdiction. Innocent until proven guilty does not mean all cops are innocent and anyone who makes an accusation is a liar. As you have implied at several junctures when discussing these types of things.
And to correct you. I do not do all caps. If you want to add emphasis please make sure you point that out when stating that someone said something.Yes, they are a liar for making accusations (declarations that someone is a murderer) without having any evidence. Even if true, they are still a liar because they are presenting an unsupported opinion as fact.
That's why we have trials - to find the truth. Not merely take the word of an unknown person that has little to nothing (certainly not all the facts that might be ascertained) to base their opinion on.
If the internal investigation has not been completed, there is certainly no reason to jail the cop. Only after such investigation shows a reasonable conclusion of murder (or other crime), and a reasonable chance of conviction under the law, should jail ever be entertained - it's why cops cannot jail a person for more than a very short time. It takes a DA and a judge. There is also the fact that any time a cop kills there will always be those screaming for "justice", meaning jail or the chair. Family and friends are notorious for that and it is becoming more and more common with the advent of the 'net and phone video recordings.
No, not all cops are innocent and only a fool would indicate that. Certainly I've never do so - I only staunchly maintain that guilt cannot be ascertained from thousands of miles away by watching internet videos. Not even moral guilt as opposed to legal guilt.
If the "shouting" offended you, I apologize. You did not "shout" and it was an unwarranted exaggeration to suggest you did. Much like the unwarranted exaggeration to declare the cop to have committed murder after shooting someone but before any investigation.Your first two paragraphs leave no doubt that you are speaking of me. As a liar. Thank you, so much.
An accusation must be made or there will be no reason to investigate. Which, judging from your stand would suit you just fine. Thank goodness there are reasonable and compassionate people in our country who expect better from our police and our citizens. You are quickly becoming a minority. Too bad. All voices are important to keep some semblance of balance but we cannot continue to take those who turn a blind eye to the problem seriously.Actually, it was not pointed at you even though you DID make such a statement without any investigation of the facts of the case. No, it was pointed at the general internet group that always scream murder at any cop shooting. This group comprises not only friends and relatives of the deceased but a very large general internet crowd that hates any form of authority as well as the professional rabble rousers such as Sharpdon. The first sub-group can perhaps be forgiven as emotions overcome any common sense, the second just jumps on the band wagon, but the third is unforgivable.
Any cop shooting is thoroughly investigated in any decent police force, so no accusations need be made and certainly should not be made without solid evidence to back them. Nor does "compassion" require a public announcement that a cop doing his duty is a murderer - those two do not fit together at all. Believe it or not, cops are people too, and the vast majority will suffer great emotional harm from shooting a fellow human being - they do not need additional hate from the mob that has no idea of what actually happened or why.
If reason and truth make me a minority, so be it. I will not change to fit within a hanging mob that cares not for honesty, truth or caring of individuals, whether cops or not. And finally, the irrational voice of emotion that seeks to destroy the lives of cops doing their job are not important at all to keep a balance. Only to destroy, never to build.
So call for an investigation all you want - it is a necessary part of being a cop - but do it without declaring the cop a murderer before anything is actually known. One life was lost already; to ruin another out of simple ignorance or hate is irresponsible in the extreme.
While its not a bad idea , Body cams , how did we ever have law enforcement before them ! Right ? Wrong , To suggest that even a small minority of cops are crooked killers or on the take is absolutely naïve , However what it is IS the new normalcy taught to our young by an ever increasingly liberal socialistic education system , with an agenda ! The sad part is - a lot of adults swallow that up too !
Oh my gosh. And you call me naive. That's rich.
Hello Live to Learn,
If your user name is derived from a personal philosophy, we have something in common. I too enjoy learning something new everyday. But I try very hard to make sure whatever I learn is based on facts not slathered with the bias of an agenda. The media has an agenda. They may prompt me to learn something, but rarely are they the teacher.
Your feelings about the police seem to indicate you learn things differently.
Here is my point:
A 2008 Bureau of Justice report said this;
"WASHINGTON—An estimated 40 million U.S. residents age 16 or older, or about 17 percent of the population, had a face-to-face contact with a police officer in 2008, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) announced today. This is a continuing decrease in contact between police and the public, down from 19 percent of residents who had contact with the police in 2005 and 21 percent who had contact in 2002. " [I added the emphasis] Source: CONTACTS BETWEEN POLICE AND THE PUBLIC
Another report says there were about 400, (378) fatal police involved shootings that same year. Source: FBI data
Now I agree that a single loss of life could be a tragedy, (I say could because sometimes it could also be well deserved), but let's use the above numbers just as a reference to the proportions, (not exact stats to be debated), of what we are talking about.
400 fatal shootings out of 40,000,000 contacts is about one thousandth of a percent, (.001) of citizen/police contacts.
There are about 900,000, (+/-) police officers in our nation. So let's say each fatal shooting involved an average of 3 officers. (from as few as one to as many as seven officers in different incidents)
That represents a bit over a tenth of a percent, (.13) of all police officers in the U.S.
By relying on the media's presentations you have formed the opinion that "..,. I have no trust or respect for police at this moment,"
You have allowed facts representing extremely small percentages to influence your opinion of ALL police officers. Doesn't seem to be a solid foundation for an opinion to me.
Now I know my figurin' could be off, but forming an opinion on facts like that is sort of like deciding that kittens are dangerous because 1 out of every 100,000 kittens likes to scratch at human eyeballs. You don't feel that way about kittens do you?
But I did learn something today in looking for data to reply to you, so it has been a good day for me. I hope it has been a good day for you too.
GAI couldn't agree more about constant learning ! !
I live in a small town, so I interact with police daily. I don't think all police are waiting for the chance to gun someone down. However. Those who do should not be protected. They should not be celebrated and their actions should not be glossed over. That is the problem we have today. These incidents happen and there is no accountability. Excuses are made. We give them a lot of leeway because we know it can be a dangerous job. But, again. There is no excuse for murder. No one should believe themselves above the law.
Police departments do work diligently to gloss over these horrible incidents. They shouldn't. Those types of people are a disgrace to the idea of protectors of the peace and damage the entire idea of justice.
Body cams can help us hold those responsible accountable and we can clean up our police forces. It can restore our faith in them. It isn't a perfect solution, but it is a start. Those who simply gloss over the horror that is happening in the streets don't make any sense to me. Statistics don't matter to the .001 percent. Is that how you would console a family member at their funerals?"we can clean up our police forces"
No we can't. If there is just one out of that 40,000,000 incidents there will still be people touting that " the police appear to get a free pass to commit murder at will". And there will always be some, as well as "good" shootings where the media and people lie about what happened or twist it into something unrecognizable.Oh, yes we can. Once again, you unequivocally state there is no solution, because someone, somewhere will tell a lie at some time or another. Do you know how ridiculously defeatist and lame that is?
Be thankful there are reasonable folks who see the problem and are working toward solutions. Perfection will never be achieved, but surely we will not look at the murder of innocents and the systematic cover ups that ensue and throw up our hands and say nothing can be done. Surely, we will not do that.Do you know how silly it sounds to say that none of 350,000,000 people will ever lie? While you also say that perfection will never be achieved?
Yes, PP, there are problems. Yes, there are partial solutions. But you will never, ever find a perfect police force and if you put too much effort into the task, hamstringing our cops too much, you won't have a police force.I didn't realize expecting them not to shoot unless they had a valid reason was a hamstring. I'm learning so much tonight.
Well, expecting them not to shoot unless they had a valid reason in your opinion without having witnessed or experienced the situation, not even the cops reason for shooting is a hamstring. You are not a god, able to determine guilt without ever knowing what happened.
But so is wearing a vest. Or a stun gun. Or a billy club. Or a radio. Or a camera. Or anything else that even might impede their physical actions. Or being required to try and save lives. Being expected to delay shooting. Being expected to recognize and handle any and all mental diseases.
The list is long of how we hamstring our cops, but most are necessary. The question is how far can we go before we have degraded their possible effectiveness to the point they might as well not be there.If you consider wearing a body camera as an impediment; we are at an impasse. If I were a cop I would insist on wearing one because, if I was in the right I would want proof. If I was in the wrong I would want to make things right. And, if I killed another human being without justification I would expect to be held accountable.
That's just me.Cuz now more than ever cops are mindless shoot-to-kill robots? Lets just cinch the deal.
Like abstinence, respect works every time.I'm not sure why you hit reply to my post. That comment is incredibly bizarre and certainly isn't a logical response to anything I have said.
No, it doesn't. (the respect part I mean)
Ignorant is ignorant no matter how you respond to it.
GA
Hey there, since we seemed to be butting heads in our conversation, I thought it would be only fair to acknowledge that we can also agree on some things too. I agree with your comments here.
Not that I am think that body cams are the answer, but all the other stuff you said regarding the use of them.
GA
Well, if we are going to label some shootings good and some bad then I get your point. But, I don't think the term good can be used in the same sentence. Any are unfortunate. Unavoidable? Certainly.
No they are not all unavoidable. Not, anyway, without additional damage and hurt to innocent people. Anyone that thinks otherwise needs a good dose of reality.
I agree. I meant that shooting is unavoidable. It will happen. Police need to be able to protect themselves.
I heard an interview with a police department in PA after a shooting. They were honest. The spokesman said that the officer simply didn't understand that fear was not a valid reason to discharge his firearm. He killed a guy who wasn't a threat. But, that police officer thought he was justified in shooting.
That's what I'm talking about. Reasonable responses. If they are not reasonable responses then they are wrong. You can't simply kill people because you have a badge and a fire arm.Reasonable, yes, but tempered in that what is "reasonable" for an untrained citizen may not be for a cop. Hundreds of hours of training, possibly other methods of stopping the suspect, possibly with a vest, etc. I DO expect a cop to with hold fire longer than I might, but as you say recognize that sometimes killing is the best way to prevent further bloodshed or, sometimes, risk.
I fully support the idea of shooting in order to protect innocent life.I fully support the idea of a police officer not putting his or her own life at risk. But, these are not the circumstances anyone who honestly wants the system to work at its best is raising an eyebrow at.
We have a system of Law and Order.
What more do you want?Law and Order would be nice. Not vigilante justice.
I was treated with extreme harshness by some cops back in the day. I was thrown in a holding tank (and a lot of other bad stuff) for NOTHING. They misjudged me to be a hippie on some sort of a substance. Why? Cuz as a punk kid I yelled at them and pushed their buttons. My case was thrown out of court by the judge because I think he realized from my changed demeanor that I realized I had been self-righteous, disrespectful, and belligerent. I learned a lot that night.
OK. So, one experience in your life means the experiences of many others don't matter? That's interesting. That fact that you survived the night negates the fact that many aren't even left alive to give that a shot? I'm fascinated at this point.
Repeating:
Like abstinence, RESPECT works every time.
Maybe disrespect is what needs to change.
And respect for police needs to be taught.
Ultimately they are and have always been Peace officers.
How many people do you know who have been calling them "Pigs" for decades? (At least four decades by now.)ROFLMAO.
It is very, very rude to edit a comment after it has been responded to. The ROFLMAO was to the foolishness of your original two line statement.
Respect goes both ways. If it doesn't, problems come up. I am sure as a teenager you were probably scared to death and rather grovelly by the time the morning came. As an adult, I'm not inclined to grovel. If that means a police man would feel justified in mistreating me, whose problem is that? Mine, or his?I know! I know! Call on me!
It's his problem. Right?
You see we can agree. (except for the police man part, it's policeman
(yep, it's a Stolis night.}
GAOK. I did say police man and not policeman. I saw that and didn't bother to change it because it wasn't really that big of a deal to me. Glad to have given you an opportunity to correct. I'm sure that was a high five moment for you.
Well, as least you have that to fall back on.
Hello again, It looks like you did have a good day too. Quite a different tone from your first comment I responded to. (the grammar police can bite me. I will end a sentence with a preposition if I want to!)
I too live in a small town, and if I had a concern about rogue cops, I think it would be the small town forces I would be more concerned about. I think they might have less care about oversight and consequences.
Anyway...
It sounds like you are jumping the gun and reacting emotionally rather than thoughtfully. I bet you have seen times in the past when initial news reports, ie. "Breaking News," have gotten things a lot more wrong than right. This could possibly be another one of those times.
I saw the "Breaking News" first video, and it did look bad for the cops. It still may, but, I think my opinion will wait for the hub-bub to die down and some facts to emerge.
Now news media are reporting on a second yet-to-be-released video. Here is a blurb from CNN.com:
I am not drawing any conclusions either way yet. You, on the other hand, immediately condemned the cops as murders. You may end up being right, but if there is any truth to the reporting about the second video, you more probably will end up as just one more of the herd that jumped over the cliff the media reporting led you to.
Unfortunately, your condemnation of the cops and declaration that, "Police departments do work diligently to gloss over these horrible incidents," reflect a quick-draw assumption apparently based on surface impressions rather than thoughtful consideration. And in an incident as serious as this one, I would certainly want to know what I was talking about before viewing the cops as pinatas to be beat on just to see what falls out.
In the end, the facts may show the shooting was unjustified, but I won't be eating any crow served up by emotional declarations. I will however, be standing with you calling for their arrests and murder charges - if the shake-out of facts prove your gut reaction to be right. But right now, you are on your own. Nobody knows the lucky number until the wheel stops spinning.
GAI would disagree with that assessment. Small towns have many eyes and many mouths. They are smaller so truth can't be hidden as easily because we know each other.
Not really. It was a simple video. I think we all know that when the 'hub bub' dies down what we have are a lot of spins on the truth. We pick the one most palatable. It isn't always the truth. 'Something in his hand' wouldn't hold up in a court of law if you had shot someone who was not attacking you. I see 'something in people's hands' all the time. If I walked around shooting people for that I wonder how long I would be allowed to do so.
Did you watch the video? The guy did not attack the police. I know police get away with such. It happens all the time. But, is it right? Is this who we want our face to be to the world?
And, this may be shown to be true. But, at the moment that he was shot none of that was going on. Had he been charging with a knife at the moment he was shot.....being shot would make sense. I don't think shoving a chair is justification for murder. But, hey. I don't live in Texas.
Well, we shall see how this investigation pans out. I will say that there have been some police officers charged with homicide over the last few months who were shocked that it wasn't business as usual any more. My condemnation of the cops is not a quick draw assumption. What it is is simple horror at video footage that shows, time and again, brute force with no common decency. The guy in New York killed by cops for the great crime of selling single cigarettes on the sidewalk. The 12 year old boy gunned down for being a 12 year old boy. The list goes on and on and on. We have every reason to be suspicious at this point.
My gut tells me that if that was you, or me, with the gun in that video we would be behind bars right now awaiting arraignment. Whether we would ultimately be proven guilty or innocent is not the point. Anything less for police in the same situation is unacceptable.You seem determined to defend the "truth" of your first gut-reaction to one video. I am just as determined to wait for more information before drawing a conclusion.
You also seem determined to state your perception as fact:
"... 'Something in his hand' wouldn't hold up in a court of law..."
Did you miss the interviewee's declaration that because of the on-going investigation he would not say what the video showed in his hand - but he would say that he saw something in his hand?
"... I know police get away with such. It happens all the time. ..."
How do you know it happens all the time? Is this just an emotional impression, (that you take as proof of truth), or do you actually know of specific cases that prove it happens "all the time?" (I understand the use of that phrase. We all use it at times, but such a broad accusation must surely have some factual basis. Can you cite more than one or two instances that would justify "all the time?")
"...I will say that there have been some police officers charged with homicide over the last few months who were shocked that it wasn't business as usual any more...."
I understand that it may seem petty to say; "cite your proof," or present a link," etc., but when you make a statement like that, it doesn't seem to much to ask for the instance(s) that caused you to form that impression. So... show me the money! Where did this happen in the last few months, and how do you know they were shocked?
As for your New York and 12 yr. old boy examples, you are wrong on both counts, but they have already been discussed at length here - so you need some new fodder.
Finally, why do you think it would be different if it had been you are me? Are you now accusing the cops of racial prejudice too?
GAI do actually know of specific cases, two to be exact, where an officer got away with taking the life of another human being when anyone with an ounce of sense would not have reacted in the same manner, nor would anyone have died that day. And they are still on duty, still carrying guns and I can tell you I was stopped by one of them and I was a little scared. Because if he had acted in a manner which was not in line with what a person with an ounce of sense would in other situations; how would he act in ours?
You can certainly ignore the problem in America today but, as I've said before justice is not justice unless it is applied fairly across the board. Simply because a small minority who wouldn't be listed in the who's who of stellar citizens are the ones being subjected to the brutality it may seem prudent to you to hope it is swept under the rug. It may seem logical to you that if only the tiny minority is being treated poorly that we should celebrate the fact that it isn't the vast majority. But, look at what we are now faced with.
Police departments across America feel under attack and they are probably justified in feeling so. The city closest to where we live is acting appropriately, imo. The police chief is working diligently to bring the police force and the community together. He walks the streets with his staff in even the parts of the city which are considered the worst. Talking to the public. Putting faces to faces so that it isn't an us against them mentality. Crime is down 14% since he took office. Is it his policy or fluke? I don't know.
I will tell you that this ridiculous tendency I see where people just give carte blanche support to police, not insisting on oversight and accountability, is one of the major reasons we have reached this juncture. Video does not lie. People are getting savvy and they are documenting the injustices not because they hate the police. It is because they expect better of them. And is that such a bad thing?
As to your statement about accusing cops of racial prejudice. How do you know what color or nationality I am? You don't. My point was when things hit closer to home we tend to look at them more closely and learn to empathize with others it has happened to. We stop using blinders which allow us to think there was some reason someone was mistreated. We learn to realize it happens. And it shouldn't. It wouldn't if we all cared a little more about everyone and not our own selfish lives.Oh my!
In some situations tenacity can be an attribute, but sometimes it can be confused with blind persistence, and that is seldom a positive thing.
This all started with your declaration that you did not trust or respect any police officer. Then, as the embers of your passionate response to the first video cooled, you became more temperate and began qualifying, and, quantifying your declaration.
I am not ignoring any problem. I am just refusing to jump on your "Oh my Gawd!, the police get away with murder " bandwagon. And I am also refusing to swallow, as fact, your declarations that it is a pervasive, ignored, and too-often-condoned occurrence.
You legitimized your perception of a local, (to you), event with "... when anyone with an ounce of sense " affirmation. Well, is your version of common sense universal? My concept of common sense says those snake handling churches in West Virginia are nuts. Do you think their interpretation of common sense would agree with me?
Further, I sweep nothing under the rug, and for you to imply that is the gist of my thinking, based on my disagreement with your knee-jerk reactions to a still unfolding situation is just obstinate. More like that country song; "That's my story, and I'm sticking to it!" response than a rational counterpoint. If you can prove I am wrong and you are right, why not just do it?
Further still, I do think any avoidable loss of life is tragic, and I said so in my first response to you, but now you say: " It may seem logical to you that if only the tiny minority is being treated poorly that we should celebrate the fact that it isn't the vast majority."
What the hell? Are you a mind reader now? Because nowhere in my responses have I indicated that. When I spoke of tiny percentages it was relative to the shaky foundation you based your opinion on. To carry it further then that was purely your own effort.
Then as a finishing touch you declare; "''' people just give carte blanche support to police..." I am puzzled why you would bring that point up. I have not seen that in this thread. Or in my exchanges with you. It appears that you think that applies to anyone that does not immediately form the same conclusions as you based on the same lack of facts that you rely on. I give no one "carte blanche" - I just refuse to join the lynch mob.
But, on your last point you were right, because I misread what you wrote. You said;
"My gut tells me that if that was you, or me, with the gun in that video we would be behind bars right now awaiting arraignment. ."
I read that wrong. I read it as if you meant if you or I were the "perpetrator." My apologies. and your closing point has properly taken me to task.
Otherwise, I believe you are wrong, have obstinately defended your misguided generalizations, and have applied interpretations to my comments that only a grammatical gymnast would attempt.
GAI couldn't say that I trust or respect you. That isn't an insult. It is just the truth. Not trusting or respecting the police department simply means that they have not given me any reason to believe that they can police themselves. It means that they are not actively attempting to correct the problems within their organization. It does not mean that every cop in the world is trigger happy.
I realize that jumping to conclusions can make an argument easy. But, when you jump to the wrong conclusions it helps to identify the problems within your reasoning process.
One video of one incident would lend credence to your argument. The fact that we have a cell phone armed population who are giving us videos so frequently, from around America leads me to believe this is not some left wing conspiracy, but an actual trend.
I would hope that the average person would consider it to be common sense not to kill another human being if they were not being threatened by that human being, that human being in question was unarmed, and that human being in question was not in a position to harm anyone else, and that human being was in a position where they could not escape while I was awaiting backup. I suppose since it didn't go to court we will never know but I have enough respect for our legal system to believe the position of the court would be in line with mine because the county cop who was on the scene with the state trooper also believed the situation was well under control without the use of fire arms. The state police obviously disagreed since we never had the opportunity to get anymore facts on the case.
If you say so. I don't get that from your argument, but I'm sure that simply means that you have not adequately explained your position.
I'm simply pointing out that even if one tenth of one percent of these tragic incidences are avoidable it constitutes a problem. One we must address. Your statement implied otherwise. I thought your statement was rather knee jerk; but I didn't say so previously. It trivializes the experiences of others.
Well, that was not the gist I got from reading the opening statement of this thread. If you got a different one, I'm not surprised.
I find it interesting that you speak of a lynch mob. It shows how differently we see the solution to the problem. Accusing someone of a crime does not constitute a lynch mob. It is a call to justice.
I do realize that having someone with a different opinion is offensive to many. I do believe you to be wrong also. I also believe you have applied interpretations to my comments. I simply think it is easier for some to find fault in others than to attempt to explore the truth. That's human nature for some.
- PrettyPantherposted 9 years ago0
Let's stop focusing on whether Joe Blow on the internet called a shooting by a cop "murder." Who the F cares?
There is clearly a systemic problem with police unnecessarily harming and killing civilians, then covering it up, often aided by a corrupt internal investigation and DA unwilling to charge the police they work closely with on a daily basis. If it requires outrage from the public at large for something to finally be done about it, so be it. This is how change occurs, imperfectly and with unnecessary claims and exaggerations from both sides, those who want the change and those who prefer the status quo.
Get over it, and stop quibbling over small stuff. Media exaggeration is nothing compared to avoidable death by cop.
Wait for it, now we'll quibble about the use of the term "small stuff."I care. You should care. Certainly the person being hung by media and popular opinion cares. Even the law cares - it is termed "libel" and is illegal. It is clearly a systemic problem with people unnecessarily and falsely harming cops that are performing their duties. Because there may be a larger problem (murder) does not excuse the act of libel. The concept of "innocent until proven guilty is ingrained everywhere in our justice system (thank goodness) and it behooves us all to remember that.
Nor does it require courage from the public to make such a libelous charge; it only requires that the speaker lack common courtesy and doesn't care who it might hurt. Libeling innocent people is NOT how change occurs - it is merely how the innocent are hurt.
So get over with it. Learn the difference between fact and unsupported opinion. Learn that details DO matter; that it is always in the details whether a cop (or anyone else) is a murderer, doing their job or just self defense.Deleted
li·bel
[ˈlībəl]
NOUN
a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation.
So details do matter. Why then make such a claim without knowing the details? They ARE what matter, what will make the difference, but no one seems to care. Make the claim, damage the person and wait to see what happens. No thank you.
You can't read that any other way. Publishing a false statement that damages someone is libel, and calling it "an opinion" does change the fact. You may have stated it was an opinion (which is not libel), but others have not. They simply made the statement as factual.Well, we can disagree about whether calling a cop a murderer on an internet forum rises to the level of "libel." My main point is that it pales in comparison to the problem of police abusing their power and harming and killing innocent people, then lying and covering it up. I am not overly concerned about it being covered by the media, or even exaggerated by the media. I don't believe that's a real problem, by the way (that's my opinion). I believe the argument is a distraction from the real issue, which is systemic abuse of power by the police, and the lack of accountability from our justice system.
Recruitment nationally is "way down," said Jonathan Thompson, executive director of the National Sheriff’s Association.
Chris Simons
"Governor Greg Abbott contacted President Obama and requested that he order the American flag to fly at half-staff in honor of the police officer who was shot and killed, while pumping gas, as well as other officers killed in the line of duty. Obama REFUSED.
Today in Burnet County, Texas, at the county jail, the sheriff's office and at fire stations and other county government buildings, the Texas flag flies at half-mast in honor of the deputy who was shot and killed while pumping gas. NO AMERICAN FLAGS ARE FLYING. They have been removed from the flag poles."< ... the Texas flag flies at half-mast in honor of the deputy who was shot and killed while pumping gas. NO AMERICAN FLAGS ARE FLYING.
They have been removed from the flag poles.">
… well, Good!
- describe a non-stellar citizen.
since there are so few of them. we don't even need police officers.
lets just get rid of them.
? why should they bother anyway ?
... especially these days.
http://www.fairus.org/issue/examples-of … gal-aliensNon stellar citizen? I would think most would describe drug dealers, child abusers and the like as such. I'm sure we could all put together a list of behavior patterns we consider to be the most destructive to a peaceful society. We may not all agree on all of the patterns on the list; but I do think there is a tendency in some to minimize the value of a human life when we perceive that life functioning within the parameter of those behavior patterns.
I have no idea what the point of the rest of your post was. I assume you were going for sarcasm. I think you fell a little flat there.it is an emotional reaction toward you as you indicate that the average typical cop is to be hated.
LOL. I have not indicted that in any way shape or form. I have stated that police should be held accountable if the function outside of the law. If you think the average cop does that; it may be your problem.
LOL. Are you saying if I was a cop for a month I'd find shooting an unarmed civilian acceptable? I'm pretty sure my moral compass is stronger than that.
If you have had your life on the line more than a couple dozen times.
Oh my gosh. So, you are saying having your life on the line a couple of times is justification for taking human life without cause? I didn't know that.
"I have no trust or respect for police at this moment."
"I'm simply shocked and amazed that so many are so willing to turn a blind eye to the police brutality that is being documented daily."
"Maybe cops just kill so they can have an extra holiday."
"...yet the police appear to get a free pass to commit murder at will."
"we will continue to see this wanton disregard for the laws we are expected to abide by"
"<Justice is>Not when we allow some 'internal investigation' to gloss over abhorrent behavior patterns which result in death or injury to others."
"Police departments do work diligently to gloss over these horrible incidents."
"My condemnation of the cops is not a quick draw assumption."
"What it is is simple horror at video footage that shows, time and again, brute force with no common decency."
You have to admit that, all put together, it presents a pretty bleak picture of how you view police. Maybe Kathryn and I both are taking your words wrong (as you have certainly taken mine wrong in assuming I think cops do no wrong), but you have repeated the same thing time after time. Paraphrasing, "Cops are evil, cops commonly kill without reason, cops always cover for each other, cops are not held accountable, etc."I will say that if a cop walked in and an employee asked if they should be given a discount I'd counter with a command to charge them double. But, that is simply because of the cops I know around here.
I think they have permanently crossed my number off of phones to call asking for charitable contributions.
My primary problem is not with the majority of cops but with the tendency of the system to protect the bad ones. I read something about a guy who was looking into lawsuits brought against a police department in a major city. I think it was Chicago. He said the majority of the problems were caused by a small minority of the cops. The department was apparently not bright enough to put 2 and 2 together.
The tendency for any system to gloss over problems, pretend they don't exist, attack those who say they do and to generally work diligently against solutions is not confined to our police forces.I see the problem in the police as the same in any hierarchy. Power corrupts, and feeds on itself as well. Those willing to cross the line, in most anything, gain power from it. We see it in corporate structures and most definitely in our "servants" in D.C.
In the police, though, the people DO have a voice if they are willing to use it. I said it before - the proper response to a seeming murder is not to declare the cop a murderer without any evidence beyond an internet video from across the country. It is to call for a thorough investigation, and one open to public scrutiny. Some will never agree with anything that does not find guilt with any cop who has killed someone, but the majority of people that take the time and effort to follow the trail and learn, do generally agree. When they don't, it's time to put pressure on up the political line, but never to "convict" anyone in the public arena. That's the mob philosophy at work and while it provides some comfort it never provides justice. Never, regardless of truth, guilt or anything else.
Boise, Id has an "ombudsman" which has had tremendous success. A job I would never be interested in, it has nevertheless been of tremendous help in both investigations of police "wrongdoing" and community interaction with police. http://www.idahostatesman.com/2015/02/1 … dsman.html
(I see from the article that Seattle, Wa. also has such a position)I will agree that the people do have a voice, at times. But, public outcry has to be very strong in order to get the inquiry out of the hands of internal investigation and into the hands of the people. People have to push, and literally scream, and get the involvement of the media in order to force the hand of the police departments. But, even when we reach that point we have ample evidence that at time evidence is withheld, doctored, fabricated or whatever needs to be done in order to manipulate the process.
I realize many of you think that my stance is wrong. That's OK. I don't agree with the tendency to be lackadaisical about the problem we see exists in some cases. Wait and see is fine, if we have a good system which lends itself to allow the average citizen and the family of the wronged party to believe that we are going to truly see the truth. And, I like the idea of an ombudsman but that position, too, can be corrupted.
We need complete transparency. These are public servants, being paid through our monies derived from our pockets. We have a right to believe that their actions are in line with the laws we abide by.
There seems to be this bizarre belief that expecting the law to function within the law is a call for anarchy. I think we are witnessing anarchy in these videos and we need to correct it.Yes, the ombudsman can be corrupted - any position can. But so far it has proven itself very well and should be used in any large police force.
You may think the videos show anarchy but don't really have the faintest if that is true or not. So correct it, but without harming innocent cops in the process by labeling them with a false title that will ruin their future.I sincerely doubt that Live to Learn's labels are ruining anyone's future. Again, so dramatic.
Edited to add: but there is no doubt that the dead guy's future is ruined.
<" What it is is simple horror at video footage that shows, time and again, brute force with no common decency. The guy in New York killed by cops for the great crime of selling single cigarettes on the sidewalk. The 12 year old boy gunned down for being a 12 year old boy. The list goes on and on and on. We have every reason to be suspicious at this point. ">
You over simplify these incidents.
Heaven help us if we don't have cops, especially as criminals with no heart or soul cross the border and do what they do to survive: Kill and rape.I can see where the disconnect is here. I say videos show time and again. You think that means always. I drink coffee time and again. I don't drink it all day. These videos show weak links in our system. My problem is that many people (many in this thread) attempt to pretend we don't have weak links. That behavior exacerbates the problem. It doesn't help it.
We aren't talking about immigration here. If you want boots on the ground at the border to shoot potential illegal aliens you'll need to start another thread.
You should see the faces of these criminals. You can see in their eyes they have no humanity left. This is what our cops have been facing for decades and now bring in the clowns.
That is, in my opinion, a callous and inhumane statement. Even if it were true do we lose our humanity in response? I would hope not.
Cops are human too. Cops are human too. Coops are human too. How many times should I repeat this?
When we can't trust the institution of law and order we are done.
Take down all the American flags and give the gov't the finger.
TODAY.The rest of us are human too. The rest of us are human too. The rest of us are human too.
I shouldn't even have to say that. It should be obvious.
If you want to put blind faith in something that is your choice. You can't force others to blindly accept injustice.
For cops to wear cameras only discourages them form being human even more.
If I were a cop forced to wear a CAMERA, I would QUIT!That statement is so freakishly bizarre it is difficult to wrap my head around.
Why?
Wouldn't you welcome tangible proof of your integrity? Or is just the inference that your integrity needs validating insulting to you?
GAOh, the horror of being watched by a camera! Oh, the indignity. OHHhhhhhhhh!
I wonder how others tolerate it. Bank tellers, retail employees, hall monitors, day care providers, restaurant workers..... Shall I go on?
Poor, poor police. As public servants, they STILL are not required to use body cameras while any private sector employer can monitor their employees by camera as well as read every email and look at what they do on the internet. All this sympathy for a highly empowered employee of the people that they might have to endure what us peons have done for years....is fascinating.
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
Since the beginning of police in America , there were no cameras . Period . And yet today there is this drive to arm the free will of the people with this empowerment . For one thing human nature is inclined to not believe that which is front of their noses anyway , ever served on a jury ? The evidence can sit right on the noses of jurors and there will still be dissention in the ranks . I have sat and passed pictures, still photos of a crime in progress and there is still the doubt .
One bad apple and popular opinion changes like dirty diapers in public. It is but a small fraction of police that are 'bad'. That is the problem with public opinion , Next year body cams will be a bad idea because enough people cannot get the charges dropped . Anyone who believes that all cops , even a majority of them , are bad is a fool , Those of you should stop watching so many action adventure movies , your judgement'sare severely clouded !
Todays public breaks more laws everyday in traffic alone to tell me that all you want are less and less policing to begin with . Just think , when you argue the speeding ticket ; not only is there radar , but the police cams . You will have to pay the fine that you generally argue or bribe your way out of ! Just thinking with common sense here !At the beginning of the police there were no computers, no DNA analysis and no fingerprint analysis. I suppose, by your argument we should strip our police of any tools not available at the outset? Interesting idea. There were also no automobiles. Should we put them all on horseback? Give them all old style revolvers?
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
Live To Learn , Seems to think that public opinion is the best judge of a cop's behavior , that taking internal investigative control out of the police , out of the courts , IS the better plan . How naïve is it to believe that watching a few cops shows on prime time better qualifies the voting public to judge any legal action . Perhaps we can bring back public hangings of cops ! Bring your lawn chairs , your coolers , bring the kids and your mother- in -law , how about the bottle rockets and even nightly fireworks ?
The only thing worse is expecting the every fluxing , ever changing and all out anarchy of public opinion to control itself , in any way . Opinions about any subjects change in an instant giving the absolute fluidity of public opinion , That is the worse place to expect uniformity , Ask any political entity why public polls and opinions aren't to important to them at any given moment ?
Because they change .
I still vote in favor of the police .Out of the hands of the police is not out of the hands of the courts. I trust the courts more than the police to determine if an individual has broken our laws. Plus, I do think it is imperative to bring a person to the courts alive and breathing.
Who, exactly, is declaring war on law enforcement? I'm dyin' to know.
Do open minded research and come back and tell me who you judge,
The burden of proof is on you, my dear. Logic 101.
I think we are probably in a time where police officers are at much more risk. It's sad when something may happen on one side of the country and some on another side use it as 'justification' for violence.
But, we aren't talking about those instances here. We are talking about if a police officer oversteps their bounds and cease to be protectors of the peace. If a police officer oversteps his bounds and uses lethal force in a situation where none was warranted we cannot simply ignore it because there is violence in our world. And the longer we argue about it and ignore these instances, without insisting that law and order be upheld, the longer we will see what you are talking about.
One injustice does not warrant another in retaliation. Both are injustice. But, if we are truly looking for law and order we have to demand it at every step of the chain. We can't make excuses simply because it's one person on one side of the law or one on the another. All should abide by the law or be held accountable to it.
Do you agree with any of the following? Law does not include shooting first and asking questions later.....unless one's life is clearly in danger. Law does not include shooting because you are miffed at what you think someone might have done. Law does not include multiple police officers beating up on someone who is on the ground in hand cuffs. It doesn't include bashing a car window in because you don't like how far it is down during a traffic stop.
It appears that wanting all police to abide by the laws of the land is a declaration of war to some. I guess if we all turned a blind eye to any injustice documented it would make more sense to some.
Yes, we are merely asking that police be held accountable for misconduct. We have not declared open war on police and all authority; we have not said we don't respect all police; we have not said criminals are justified in committing crimes.
I get weary of this all or nothing thinking. Why oppose body cams? I still haven't heard a rational reason. If police are mostly good, then wouldn't you want body cams to prove it? If I were a police officer, I would welcome the verification that I am doing my job competently and professionally.
Oh, well, it's par for the course, right?It does appear that any call for accountability is somehow considered to be a claim that we should abandon law and order.
I'm with you on the body cam question. To be honest, I'd be highly suspicious of a police officer who refused to wear one. What is there to hide?
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
There IS an open war on Law Enforcement in America and ALL authority for that matter , Gang activity in the inner cities and outside of them too , is on the rise ! The illegaly and legally prescribed drug -over-use , by Americans , is way up . it is the altered- mind , It is the lack of impulse control in the seeking of personal freedoms and of personal pleasures in our society that fuels this war .
Does anyone really think that the killing of cops in America is simply backlash from the anger of traffic tickets being issued ,' fraid not , there is far more going on there .
Related Discussions
- 31
Over Nine Hundred Thousand Cops in America !
by ahorseback 10 years ago
Guess what ? Only a couple of them should be fired for abuse of power ? Gee , I'm just a poor white kid but I think that's a pretty good record ! And yet , there is a media driven and media fired culture-- That believe they are all Racist...
- 26
Are police officers really that nice or is that guy who helped a homeless person
by Tijani Achamlal 12 years ago
Are police officers really that nice or is that guy who helped a homeless person an exception?We live in a society in which by you are judged by what you have and not by who you are. We usually look down on poor people and disregard the homeless. I'm usually only used to cops who ticket you and are...
- 112
Police Officers: Should they wear cameras or not
by Jennifer Kessner 8 years ago
If you haven't kept up to date on the issues in Ferguson, here is a drastically simplified version of events:1. On August 9th, a St. Louis County police officer shot an unarmed 18-year-old young black man. 2. The officer shot him SIX TIMES. With a pause in between. The office shot twice,...
- 37
Who Will cry for this one ?
by ahorseback 9 years ago
Let's see just how long this death will stay in the news , a man who could never say ," I will see you tonight Mom " . Killed while on duty in NY City last week . Let's see if our media remembers for more than the usual...
- 800
Are we witnessing "Racial Creep"?
by Mike Russo 10 years ago
I know this is going to be controversial, but I'm deeply concerned about racism in this country. There seems to be many more shootings of unarmed black men by white police in the last few months. This latest shooting in Ferguson Missouri has me wondering, are these pent-up tensions...
- 20
Is it true that most police officers in the UK don't have guns?
by Susie Lehto 7 years ago
It seems apparent from reading reports after the terrorist attack in the UK that most of their officers don't have guns.