From someone who's father was a county sheriff I speak from personal experience that approximately 10% of cops can be trusted. My sheriff dad used to beat my mother and me on aregular basis. I wish someone would have had a camera. His deputy's would show up sometimes if they felt like responding to the call and take him for a cup of coffee.

Later in life I tried to file a police report about a rock that destroyed my drivers window and hit me in the head and was told by a different sheriffs department that I had to report this incident in another county. That's a l;oad of crap yoou report in the county the incident took place in.

Two years ago a city police dept one town over from where I live had to fire 5 officers because they were pulling women over and threatening them with tickets if they did not perform oral sex on them.

I could keep going just with personal experiences but this just shows that cops abusing their authority is by no means scattered. The majority of cops are crooked and that's sad for the few who are actually trying to help their community.

Originally posted by iggythecat
The majority of cops are crooked and that's sad for the few who are actually trying to help their community.

That's why I say that the good ones need to weed out and police the bad ones. If not, then it is time for the citizens to start doing it.

Cameras work well. That's why cops hate them.

BTW, my brother and cousin are LEO, I too know how they think and operate. I love my brother and hope he's one of the good ones but unfortunately, I have heard him and his cop friends when they start to drink. Really turns me off of the "good cop" idea.

And so we take another step towards becoming the UK.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

Some of the folks commenting seem almost naive about this. I live in Chicago, which has a long, sordid history of corruption and violence in its police department. More than90% of the police here are good, honest, caring people trying to do a nasty job. But there are a few criminals who abuse people, steal, lie, torture suspects to wring "confessions" out of them, etc. The others, while not approving, don't speak out because their lives may one day depend on that person being there for them.

In Chicago there have been incidents where the police confiscate cameras from TV and other reporters. Of course we have only the written accounts of this, since the cameras were destroyed or erased. The police do NOT like to have their arrests recorded. Often it is because they don't follow the law when making the arrests.

I once wrote a blog entry that quoted a police department's definition of a gang:

A gang is an organized group with a recognized leader whose activities are either criminal or, at the very least, threatening to the community. Unity, identity, loyalty and reward are normal characteristics that are admired, but when associated with gangs they become distorted. They are traits each gang shares in order to survive. Gangs display their identity and unity in obvious ways, such as the use of jewelry, selected colored clothing, jargon and signals. Members remain together in quiet times as well as in conflict. In response to this twisted loyalty, gang members are rewarded by being accepted and recognized as a gang member.

I pointed out that many of these signs apply as well to the police, as to gangs. Suddenly my blog was getting hits by readers from the Chicago Police. I found that worrisome, especially since hardly anyone ever reads that blog. It suggests that there is some automated process working to detect "suspicious" (read: critical) text, and alert someone about it. How else to explain why the blog went from 3 or 4 hits a day, to a sudden flurry of interest, all from the Chicago Police Headquarters?

But hey - maybe it was all just a big coincidence.