It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

So You Hate Cops

page: 30
23
<< 27  28  29    31  32 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by seagull
Nice bit of stereotyping there, MM. Equating police officers everywhere with Concentration Guards, good one...
.


I always thought the use of sarcasm and the eye roll were a method to avoid articulating a counterpoint. And it may not be officers everywhere, but there are many who by day will use excessive force, taser, pepper spray and otherwise harass innocent people, then by night go home to a kind loving family who know nothing of what daddy did at work today. Much like concentration camp guards.

And yes, there were some guards at concentration camps who were less abusive, and even somewhat kind to the prisoners, but it didn't make them any less accountable for the abuse the inmates suffered at the hands of the other guards, and the system in general.




posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 11:34 AM
link   
what's the deal with my post disappearing?



Edit: Oh wait, there it is.....

[edit on 27-1-2008 by Rasobasi420]



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 


Waste of time and your good intellect Seagull...

Anytime anyone posts absolutes in such a ridiculous manner, you know you're not dealing with someone that can socialize or articulate on your level, much less debate, but thanks for trying anyway...

It's ironic how the meaning of this old adage flips in these instances...

"Don't argue with a pig, you only get dirty and the pig likes it"

Irony at it's finest...The duality..... The duality.....

Semper



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Seagull & Semper, the point I was making was that perfectly normal loving husbands and wives, mothers fathers etc. can and are just that till they put on a unifrom, any uniform, anywhere and in any time and that transision moves them from that loving caring person into a killing hurting machine for the benefit of the few and not the many.

And Seagull I did say most Police forces are corrupt, its a pity people like you and Semper only see what you want to see when reading the comments of other posters.



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 03:43 PM
link   
And Semper I'm so far above your intellect that you cannot even see me but as normal people of yours seek to to use name calling and the like because you are simply not equiped to do any better but one must always aspire to achieve a higher level and maybe you will get there one day.



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 06:31 PM
link   
Let's keep the personal commentary to a minimum. The topic of this thread is "So You Hate Cops", and not the level of one another's intelligence.

Further off topic posts will be dealt with accordingly.

If you have an issue with another member, please submit a complaint.

Thank you.



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 07:02 PM
link   

And Seagull I did say most Police forces are corrupt,


So you are saying, intellectually, that what? Two out of three are corrupt. Does that qualify for the verbiage "most"?

3 out of 4

9 out of 10

Exactly what percentage qualifies as "most" that you would have thinking individuals swallow as your absolute in reference to the thousands of police forces throughout the nation? Right...

What percent of the police officers must be corrupt in that police force to again fulfill your "most" qualification?

5%
10%
50%
99%

And all of those hundreds of police departments with one man, or two, must they be corrupt half the time? Or must they be corrupt 3/4 of the time to finish out your obviously knowledgeable position.

Now after the Marines, I have served the public in three states in numerous police departments with 2 men, 5 men, 50+ and 100+ and funny, I've never seen this blatant corruption you have obviously been exposed to in your how many years of experience??? As a police officer? Prosecutor? You must be in the loop surely.

Right

Semper



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis

And Seagull I did say most Police forces are corrupt,


So you are saying, intellectually, that what? Two out of three are corrupt. Does that qualify for the verbiage "most"?

3 out of 4

9 out of 10

Exactly what percentage qualifies as "most" that you would have thinking individuals swallow as your absolute in reference to the thousands of police forces throughout the nation? Right...

What percent of the police officers must be corrupt in that police force to again fulfill your "most" qualification?

5%
10%
50%
99%

And all of those hundreds of police departments with one man, or two, must they be corrupt half the time? Or must they be corrupt 3/4 of the time to finish out your obviously knowledgeable position.

Now after the Marines, I have served the public in three states in numerous police departments with 2 men, 5 men, 50+ and 100+ and funny, I've never seen this blatant corruption you have obviously been exposed to in your how many years of experience??? As a police officer? Prosecutor? You must be in the loop surely.

Right

Semper


Not sure who said most Cops are corrupt, as I'm not digging through 30 pages of posts for it. I know I made the comment of having seen enough of it though. Not all Cops are corrupt, but there are some out there. I don't know the percentages, and like I said before, semperfortis isn't one of them. You're a great guy, semperfortis.

Keep up the good work, and stay safe. Semper Fi, Do Or Die. Hooyah.



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 


I would never argue that there are "some" out there. That is a perfectly acceptable qualification from a reasonable mind.

There are corrupt prosecutors, judges, construction workers and jailers as well. In fact there is some amount of corruption in every profession you can name. The terminology "most" however is just plain stupid. Not really any other way to describe it other than that.

Thanks SKL, I appreciate that....

Semper



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 


I would never argue that there are "some" out there. That is a perfectly acceptable qualification from a reasonable mind.

There are corrupt prosecutors, judges, construction workers and jailers as well. In fact there is some amount of corruption in every profession you can name. The terminology "most" however is just plain stupid. Not really any other way to describe it other than that.

Thanks SKL, I appreciate that....

Semper


No problem dude. Yes, corruption is rampant in all fields, Law Enforcement, Politics, Industry, and Big Business. It's not who you are but what you do that defines you.

I love that quote from Batman Begins. SF, hang tight, and keep up the good fight. I hope to meet you some day.



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 11:08 PM
link   
reply to post by magicmushroom
 


I'd be interested in knowing what your occupation is magicmushroom.
What career have you chosen that is so holy and righteous and beyond reproach? It must be completely free of any sort of corruption or bad people! Can your life's work be so untainted and pure?



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 11:57 PM
link   
"most". What a loaded word. It can mean so many things...

No one here has denied there are corrupt cops, least of all me, out there in the world. The problem I have is with this constant refrain of "most". No proof, other than slander and anecdotal, that "most" are corrupt.

"most" cops are average work a day Joes/Josephines just trying to do the best they can. "most" are no more corrupt than you or I.



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 


Maybe so...

However, if I were to be corrupt in my field, I might walk away with some stolen electronics, and if I'm caught, I'm fired or arrested.

If a McDonald's employee were corrupt they'd end up stealing Big Macs and fries, probably ending up with them being fired.

If a cop is corrupt, it could end up in the abuse or even death of civilians. And, if caught, the offending officer would likely end up with a paid suspension (also known as forced vacation).

So, although 'most' cops may not be corrupt, the 'few' that are pose a greater danger to the community than a corrupt IT guy or a corrupt McDonald's worker. Which means that I'm going to be much more careful in approaching the guy packing a 9mm than I am the guy packing lunch.



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 09:54 AM
link   
And the Corrupt Construction Contractor puts an entire family at risk of death by using below grade materials. Risking dangerous mold infections, deadly wiring problems and potential building collapse.

Is your prejudice reserved for police only or do you also approach the deadly dangerous contractor, that I have just shown is easily as deadly as any corrupt cop, with equal trepidation?

The corrupt McDonalds worker you mention can of course be as deadly or more so than any cop. You failed to mention the corrupt McDonalds worker that puts deadly urine in peoples drinks, or feces on their food. Far more deadly than the average cop as the majority of cops have NEVER even drawn their guns. That's correct, that is a statistic and accurate. So these deadly professions you mention, are you also prejudiced against them? Do you also approach them cautiously? Or just the cops you apparently hate?

Hypocrisy is a terrible thing, lucky for us, it's also easy to see.

Semper



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by semperfortis
 


If the corrupt construction worker were carrying a large and deadly device, like a hammer, then yes, I'd be cautious.

And I know I take a risk every time I eat a Big Mac. As a matter of fact, I'd bet a little urine in my coke would actually make it healthier.

The main cause for concern is in the carrying of harmful and deadly weapons. And, knowing that enough police are capable and willing to abuse their power is enough to cause me to be concerned and cautious around them. It makes me feel a little safer walking down the street at knight. Anytime I see someone with a gun on their hip I'm cautious, gangster or cop.

Not saying all though. You know that I've had my fair share of good experiences with the police, but I've also had my fair share of abuse. What does that say? It says be careful around the police, you never know when you'll be tased, or sprayed, or shot for taking your wallet out of your jacket pocket.

Hate? No.
Caution? Yes.


[edit on 28-1-2008 by Rasobasi420]



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Rasobasi420
 


Rasobasi, I understand what you are saying. Those that are corrupt should be held accountable for their actions. I've never said otherwise. My whole problem is the constant refrain from some, who shall remain nameless, that all or "most" are corrupt.

Corrupt anyone's can, as Semper pointed out, be as dangerous in their own way, as any corrupt policeofficer ever born.

Holding the police accountable for their corruption is our job as citizens, and taxpayers. We have a duty to the good ones, and to ourselves to do this. If you aren't willing to do this, I mean you as a general term, not you specifically Raso; then you are going to get what you deserve...



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 


I'm from Providence RI, which until recently had one of the more corrupt city governments in the Northeast. Eventually (after many decades of corruption) the city government went through an overhaul and much (not all) of the corruption went away, and our city's mayor went to prison.

The chief of police was replaced, and the corrupt force is still being weeded out. Unfortunately, it's not as easy to get rid of the corruption as you'd hope. It is possible though.

Unfortunately, those with the weakest voice are the one's with the most to say. And, when they try to speak up, they are often shot down (sometimes literally, sometimes figuratively). So, while trying to speak up, do they still deserve 'what they get'.

All I advise is caution. The same advice I'd give someone who sees a group of people wearing gang colors. I'm sure there are some gangsters who'd help an old woman cross the street, or help a kid who got his Frisbee stuck in a tree, but his cohorts may just be douchebags.



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 11:55 AM
link   
Life is full of risks and one puts control measures inplace to remove or reduce said risks but as an individual there are risks that you cannot control or remove you have to relly on governing bodies to do it for you.

It has been stated here by many that there are corrupt cops but corruption is in every walk of like is it not but when those whom have the power to control such people dont take action then they themselves are corrupt if they do not do what is right.

And therein lies the problem, corrupt officers who are then protected by a corrupt system and just because we know there is corruption elsewhere does not mitigate that corruption. But to the question, so you hate the police no I cannot say I do, I dont trust them or those who control them.

The problem is is that many make the mistake of comparing the police and their work to everyday Joes/Janes but they are not, we are civies and they are part of the military make up if they are aware of it or not so to draw such comparisons is wrong.

The average person doing their average job do not go out and hurt people, brutalise them or kill them, it is not the job of the police to kill and hurt ordinary people. And every time one officer carries out such actions it is a stain on the whole, one cannot seperate the bits out that one likes when it suits. Again people use the oh cops are just doing there job and are just human as if to negate the crimes that are commited by members in their ranks.

But in America something else is happening something that is very sinsister, police armed to the teeth roaming the streets allegedly because of the WOT but thats bullcrap, those very same officers are now targetting the people, be it civil disobedience or indiviudal questioning of the system. The days of protect and serve are long gone. That slogan should be replaced with we protect and serve our political masters the rich and powerful and you the little people well were comming to stomp all over you.

Who I am, what I do, where I live is irrelevant but I do have a crystal ball.



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by magicmushroom

But in America something else is happening something that is very sinsister, police armed to the teeth roaming the streets allegedly because of the WOT but thats bullcrap, those very same officers are now targetting the people, be it civil disobedience or indiviudal questioning of the system. The days of protect and serve are long gone. That slogan should be replaced with we protect and serve our political masters the rich and powerful and you the little people well were comming to stomp all over you.


Funny story...

In 2000 I was attending a peaceful anti-death penalty protest in Philadelphia during the RNC when dozens of police officers on horseback came in stomping. Dozens of people were arrested, beaten and thrown in jail. I was charged with felony assault on an officer facing 25 years for allegedly throwing a water balloon. For the record, I did not throw the water balloon. I was however, the only black person arrested at this particular protest. I think it may have been racial, but I can't confirm one way or the other. I can confirm that there were many who weren't protesters, but who had decided to cut through center city on their way home from work.

Anyway, after I was arrested, I was thrown in a holding cell with 6 other prisoners. All phone calls to attorneys were denied, and I wasn't mirandized until the 4th day in holding. On the fifth day I was transfered to a penitentiary where I was finally allowed to make a phone call. I was 18 so I called my mother, and she drove down that same day to post bail and get me out.

The entire time we were held we pleaded with officers (any officer) to let us make a phone call. To tell us what we were charged with, or to acknowledge that what was happening was wrong. We got nothing. This is from an entire precinct. I'm sure the same thing was happening at others as well.

So, when it comes down to it, they just follow orders. No matter how corrupt the orders are, or how damaging it is to innocent civilians.

I do wonder Semper, how would you have handled the situation? If you knew full well that there was a jail full of people who were being held without a phone call, without knowing what the charge was, and without being mirandized, what would you have done? I just want the perspective of a good cop here, because I'm pretty sure there were none in the precinct that week.

Edit:
And Semper, I don't mean to call you out on this one, but you are an officer who I've come to respect and one who I know is out fighting the good fight. I just want to know what a good officer is supposed to do in such an extreme circumstance.

And, to mention, it was a new mayor of Philly at the time (I think John Street) and the governer was Tom Ridge (current director of Homeland Security)

[edit on 28-1-2008 by Rasobasi420]



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 04:02 PM
link   
Well first and foremost I would approach everything constitutionally.

1. Miranda is only required when BOTH Custody and Questioning are present.

** You can be in custody and NOT questioned and Miranda is NOT required or necessary.**
***You can be questioned and NOT in custody and Miranda is NOT required or necessary.**

****Both Questioning and Custody must be in place for Miranda to be required****

2. There is no Constitutional Right to a phone call. As you will recall, the Constitution was written prior to the invention of the phone. You have the absolute right to an attorney; just maybe not exactly when you want one. When you get arrested, what you want is not of great import to the officer. The courts have determined that your right to counsel must come at a reasonable time. They have also ruled that anywhere from 3 to 8 hours is considered reasonable completely dependent on the situation of course.

ie... If you are say, rowdy and an officer has to come in off his beat to let you use the phone, six hours may not be considered unreasonable.

If you are calmly sitting by a working phone and they just wont let you use it, then 10 minutes would probably be unreasonable...

Now about being notified of what your charged with....

In this state, SC, it is a law that a police officer MUST tell you what you are being charged with as the arrest is being made. If he does not, he is committing a felony...

All states are not like that.

Delaware for instance, when I arrested someone there, I did not need to inform them until I was processing them. Which could be hours after the arrest. Same in Maryland. At least at the time I was policing there. Could have changed of course. The point being, it is all up to the individual state.

Back to Miranda...

There have been several attempts to overturn the need for Miranda. Anyone that watches TV knows those rights as well as I do. I'm not advocating the need for Miranda or lack thereof, I'm just reporting here. Miranda is simple enough and really only applies for Felony Charges anyway. Any number of local and state charges that have penalties of less than a year or 100.00 fine and you don't have the right to a jury. Did you know that?

As for what happened to you, it is difficult for me to comment on as I have never heard of such a thing in all my years. Not saying it didn't happen, I just have never heard of the like. I have something like 22 years now, since 1986, and have handled dozens if not hundreds of protests both calm and unruly and I have never witnessed the police, mine or those I was assisting, cause any kind of major problem. I have seen them quell plenty, and I have quelled plenty myself. But start it? Nope, not seen that one or heard of it happening for real. Small problems involving individual officers? SURE.. Handled the IA's on those lots of times, just not huge coordinated attempts at increasing our work load.. Makes no common sense.

The thing to remember is this. A police officer at a large gathering is in a very dangerous situation. I can attest to this with the scar on my side and we never found out who wielded the knife. Anyway, a good officer will be experienced in scanning a crowd, probably better than you are and he will see things you will not be privy to or notice. That is what we do after all, we are professionals at this. And he will act upon that, or react, depending on the situation. I have processed many people for crimes I truly believe they thought they did not commit. But I know for a fact that they did. I have a policy... "WHEN IN DOUBT DONT as in arrest of course. So I know for a fact my arrests are solid. I have a current 99.8% conviction rate because I don't make shaky arrests. Not all officers follow my example, sadly.

Point is, from your perspective, the crowd may have been calm, from the officers prospective, who knows? I don't.

Hope this answers some questions....

Semper

Edit to Raso's Edit:

No problem my friend.. I have always found you to be reasonable and a pleasure to debate...

I know my answers may not be what your looking for, but I can only answer them honestly...

Semper

[edit on 1/28/2008 by semperfortis]



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 27  28  29    31  32 >>

log in

join