Cop for a Day

I know many people think that the police are bad and that we are the worst animals on the planet. As police officers we deal with some of the worst things that can happen to people, and sometimes when we are lucky, we deal with the best. We see things that nobody wants to see in real life, although in video games it's all so "cool"... The issues we deal with are so variable that it's not a specific job anymore.

In my career i've:

dealt with domestic violence
helped the homeless
played with children
been the taxi
dealt with family disputes
seen mental health destroy a few people
watched people change (for the good, and the bad)
seen the effects of drugs and alcohol on people

Many people don't always understand our job properly. Some think we are supposed to be superheroes, some think we are supposed to be numb machines. It's not that easy!

Here is a very interesting short video concerning this. I always laugh when I see it! I will comment more as the replies come in...

It's true, if people walked a mile in cops shoes they would ha e more appreciation for the job(s) they do. Btw, you didn't mention having to scrape dead people, sometimes kids, off of the highways. Or telling families of the same. Probably the worst part of the job. And you can't leave that at work.

reply to post by intrepid


Luckily, so far I've only dealt with adult deaths... I work in a tiny northern community north of 60 so the shock of that is even worst when they are notified, it's an entire community in shock and you know EVERYONE...

The last woman who died (about 2 weeks ago), I was sitting right next to her in a council meeting about drugs and alcohol 3 days before she died... Man that was a shock...

Thanks for the support!

reply to post by Magnum007


The problem with police is that they are not held accountable to market forces.

A bad police department that consistently treats the public like crap will stay in business.

A bad cop who treats his customers like crap will not get fired.

There are no market forces working to ensure proper behavior of police officers.

Further, the public has no recourse to deal with abusive officers outside of the court system - which is like getting into a lawsuit with your neighbor, only to find out the judge is his brother. The courts are not independent of the police, thus, they will condone abusive behavior unless the public outcry makes it politically inconvenient to do so.

Further, the police engage in all manner of constitutional abuses on a regular basis. In fact, I would go so far as to say the majority of public interaction with the police is for crimes that have harmed no one.

List of crimes where no property damage has occurred and no physical violence has occurred:

-Drunk driving
-Gun law violations
-Drug law violations
-Traffic law violations
-Non-moving vehicle violations
-Vehicle registration violations
-Tax violations
-Property code violations

the list is nearly endless.

Hence, since most of the interaction the public has with police is them trampling all over their rights, it's easy to see why most people hate the police.

People don't hate private security guards.

They hate cops.

Cops only.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
They hate cops.

Cops only.

Until they need them. Fact. Anyone that says different is either lying to themselves or to the world. Been there, seen it.

reply to post by intrepid

Until they need them. Fact. Anyone that says different is either lying to themselves or to the world. Been there, seen it.

Years ago, I needed the police because I had been burglarized in the apartment I had just moved into. The apartment was around the corner from the job I had, and was very inexpensive, so it was in a bad area. I moved into that apartment because it was affordable and at the time I was not making that much money. When the police arrived, two officers, they were rude, derisive, and had more questions as to why I was living in such a bad area, then they had regarding the burglary. They made it perfectly clear that no investigation would be happening, and I asked them what was the purpose of even calling them, of which they responded; "Good question".

Their answer and attitude was clear. They didn't appreciate being bothered for such a nominal crime, and made perfectly clear their suspicions of me for choosing to live in this neighborhood. The crime of theft was not all that important to them, but what was being made perfectly clear is that they believed I was some kind of drug addict, and that this was worthy of derision.

I was not a drug addict and didn't even drink at that time, nor do I now. Their attitude was pathetic, and they made perfectly clear that they were not really on the force to "serve and protect" people like me. When I need them? At that point, apparently I didn't make enough money to need them.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


Not meaning to be a dick JP but that's just one account. It's not fair to judge most people from one bad situation. I've seen your posts and they are usually better thought out than this. As you said, a bad area. I don't know but maybe the crack and prostitution trade takes precedence over your concern? Like you said, you knew it was a bad area. In situations like that, with limited manpower, one has to prioritize.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by andy1033
reply to post by Magnum007

 

I have worked for your group of serial killers for 2 days...

Sorry, not buying that for a second. Did you fill out an ad to work for SKUM? Serial Killers Union of Maine? C'mon, at least make this stuff believable.

Edit: Or did you determine that they were serial killers in your brief tenure with them?

reply to post by intrepid

Not meaning to be a dick JP but that's just one account.

I suppose I should have posted in that same post my continuing experiences with police officers, so as to save you the appearance of being a dick.

I was finally able to move up and out of that bad area into a very affluent area a few years later. Part of the reason those police officers who were so rude to me, I am assuming was because of my long hair. I am an artist, and tend to dress and wear my hair like many artist do. My hair was still long when I moved into the affluent neighborhood. Being a writer, I do much of my writing late at night, and would often take breaks and take a walk in the hills of which I lived. When taking these walks at least 3 or 4 times a month I would be pulled over by a police officer, often times with "back up" coming to the scene, while I would be frisked in front of my neighborhood.

Not knowing then, what I know now, and having at that point, far more respect for administrative agencies such as police forces, than I do now, I would acquiesce to being frisked. What did I have to loose by acquiescing, after all? I am not a criminal and had nothing incriminating on me at those times, so I would acquiesce to the frisking and endless questions as to why I was out at that time walking.

What did I have to loose? Apparently the respect of my neighbors, because, and especially when "back up" is called and flashing lights are kept flashing while I stand in front of my neighbors home acquiescing to being frisked, this looks like I did something wrong.

Let me be clear here. I was not doing anything wrong. I was not breaking any laws. There are no curfew laws that would prohibit me from walking in my very own neighborhood on my own street. I had bad experiences with some police officers long before the burglary in the bad area, (I used that example because it was the only time I ever needed the police, and to respond to your accusation of liar to anyone who would challenge your bold statement), but have also had many friends who were, and are, some of them in this site, police officers.

However, that affluent neighborhood being my neighborhood, and that this humiliating experience of constantly being harassed by police continued for several months, I began looking into the legality of the matter, and I did not know then, what I know now. Acquiescence to police officers is all too often a real bad idea.

Once I began politely challenging the reasons for being pulled over and questioned and frisked, and only then, did the harassment stop. Being polite to police officers and acquiescing to their pleas of frisking will not stop them from doing so in the future. Challenging their reasons, especially when done respectfully, knowledgeably and politely will.

It's not fair to judge most people from one bad situation. I've seen your posts and they are usually better thought out than this.

Again, my initial post was to give my example of the only time I ever really needed a police officer, and the bad experience I had with it, to offer some balance to your imprudent accusation that people who would challenge your claims in this thread are liars.

As you said, a bad area. I don't know but maybe the crack and prostitution trade takes precedence over your concern?

Exactly! Victimless crimes take precedent over a crime where a victim is demonstrable, and you sir, are defending this ideology. To hell with real victims, the legislatures have invented new crimes where there are no demonstrable victims and those crimes take precedent over theft.

Like you said, you knew it was a bad area. In situations like that, with limited manpower, one has to prioritize.

It is precisely this prioritization of invented crimes over real crimes that compels me to be so critical of both the administrative agencies so willing to go along with dubious legislation, and the legislatures far too willing to invent crimes at the expense of real crimes.

Note: My usage of the term administrative agencies is to distinguish police officers, (correctly so), from The Sheriff, and Deputy Sheriff's, which in most county's are elected positions, where they are held directly accountable to the people, not politicians, and for this reason, my personal experience has been that Deputy Sheriff's are far easier to deal with, and seem to have a much better understanding of the law than most police officers I have encountered do, and in fact, when challenging the reasons police will pull me over for walking in my neighborhood, a few times I have had to recommend the Sheriff be called so that someone with proper authority could handle the situation. That usually calms a police officer down, and they tend to become more willing to listen to my concerns at that point.

Originally posted by intrepid
Until they need them. Fact. Anyone that says different is either lying to themselves or to the world. Been there, seen it.

It must be nice to be sheltered enough to think that the police will actually respond to a call for distress in a timely fashion and not sit in their cruiser drinking a coffee for 45 minutes, talking to their friend in another cruiser side by side, both cars on, chatting through the window. Where do you live? Have you ever filed a police report? Tried to talk with an officer at the station? They are a bunch of condescending lunatics around here, which I find humorous because they are clearly.... simpler.... than most people.

My biggest beef with the cops is in their education. I am constantly telling them what the laws are and how they are supposed to be enforced. It's like all they do in police foundations is run laps around a gymnasium and slap eachother in the butt with towels in the shower. The other week, an officer tried to arrest my son for having a cigarette. He's 18. I don't know what the laws are like down there but here it's 16 to smoke, 19 to legally buy them. It has been like this since 1962! I've also been told by police officers that committing crimes while uttering insults that are against "protective grounds" is not illegal. They've told me that it is not their job to halt repeated work harassment... the list goes on. These "civil servants" need some serious education or I don't want to keep pretending it's worth my time or money to be providing them with a paycheck. There's people over here that actually contribute to society, not disrupt it.

I would rather live next to 100 gang members than 1 police officer; at least they know what they are fighting for.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
I was finally able to move up and out of that bad area into a very affluent area a few years later. Part of the reason those police officers who were so rude to me, I am assuming was because of my long hair. I am an artist, and tend to dress and wear my hair like many artist do. My hair was still long when I moved into the affluent neighborhood. Being a writer, I do much of my writing late at night, and would often take breaks and take a walk in the hills of which I lived. When taking these walks at least 3 or 4 times a month I would be pulled over by a police officer, often times with "back up" coming to the scene, while I would be frisked in front of my neighborhood.

So they didn't do anything for you when you called. Like I said, they have limited resources especially in high crime areas. Now you are saying they did too much? Because they checked you out in an "affluent" area? My hair is halfway down my back and the hoops in my ears doesn't scream laid back civilian. Don't take my word for it, there's pics of me in the media portal. My point? I haven't had trouble with the cops. Maybe said trouble is of ones own making.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
Hence, since most of the interaction the public has with police is them trampling all over their rights, it's easy to see why most people hate the police.

Yet again with the baseless gross generalizations and clearly unfounded nor documented blanket aspersions.

whitewashing a fence, so to speak, even though each and every plank or board has it's own grain, individual characteristics, integrity and overall strengths or weaknesses.

despite having made some rather salient points elsewhere in the post, the above comments demonstrably toss objectivity out the window in favor of personal slant and noted observable bias.

Originally posted by Brood
My biggest beef with the cops is in their education. I am constantly telling them what the laws are and how they are supposed to be enforced.

Good luck with that.

It's like all they do in police foundations is run laps around a gymnasium and slap eachother in the butt with towels in the shower.

Uh huh.

These "civil servants" need some serious education or I don't want to keep pretending it's worth my time or money to be providing them with a paycheck.

Now I know why you have problems with the cops. You know their job better than they do and DAMN, you're their boss as well. Good luck with that too.

I would rather live next to 100 gang members than 1 police officer; at least they know what they are fighting for.

You obviously have NO idea what gang members are all about. Good luck with that.... Pt. 3.

reply to post by intrepid

So they didn't do anything for you when you called. Like I said, they have limited resources especially in high crime areas.

That's correct, and truthful. When I needed the police they did not help me. Your excuse that they have limited resources in high crime areas is mainly due to the fact that they are, (willingly so if you follow the PAC lobbying of police officer associations), burdened with invented crimes at the expense of real crimes.

Now you are saying they did too much? Because they checked you out in an "affluent" area?

Did too much? They did nothing at all but waste their time and mine. Too much? Perhaps it is high time the reconsider their priorities.

My hair is halfway down my back and the hoops in my ears doesn't scream laid back civilian. Don't take my word for it, there's pics of me in the media portal. My point? I haven't had trouble with the cops. Maybe said trouble is of ones own making.

Well, that is certainly the attitude many of my neighbors took, and is why I began challenging the reasons I was being pulled over, and why I would refuse to acquiesce to unreasonable demands. In fact, I began insisting, the few times after I made clear to these police officers doing "too much", that before they leave they shake my hand. One police officer, upon hearing this demand, was incredulous and demanded to know why. I pointed to my neighbor peeking out of her window watching the event, and to his credit he laughed, realized what my problem was and shook my hand.

Prior to my non acquiescence, I was struck by how, when frisking me, they always looked in my little miniature pocket of my jeans up on top of the right leg pocket. What could they possibly be looking for in that tiny little pocket? Weapons? Stolen property? Nah...they were looking for drugs. This is what they thought they had when they pulled me over, and this is what they thought qualified as "reasonable suspicion".

Reasonable suspicion works both ways, and just as unfair as you claim it is to judge all police officers for the actions of a few, or just based on one incident, it is also unfair to assume that everyone that fits a "profile" is a drug user, or trafficker. If the police officers are getting tired of the reasonable suspicion being waged upon them, perhaps they should consider your words; that their troubles are of their own making.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Prior to my non acquiescence, I was struck by how, when frisking me, they always looked in my little miniature pocket of my jeans up on top of the right leg pocket. What could they possibly be looking for in that tiny little pocket? Weapons? Stolen property? Nah...they were looking for drugs. This is what they thought they had when they pulled me over, and this is what they thought qualified as "reasonable suspicion".

OK, a question. You mentioned "victimless crime" when I brought up crack and prostitution. Now you say they were looking for drugs. Also about "prioritizing". Are you saying that drugs are a victimless crime?

reply to post by intrepid

OK, a question. You mentioned "victimless crime" when I brought up crack and prostitution. Now you say they were looking for drugs. Also about "prioritizing". Are you saying that drugs are a victimless crime?

That's correct, and truthful. In fact, if "drugs" as you generally put it, were a crime, then pharmaceuticals wouldn't be so damn profitable, would they? Or, if they were a crime, they would be known as "drug cartels", or organized criminals.

People who use drugs, prescription or otherwise are not victimizing anyone by doing so. I personally think it is a bad idea to take even aspirin or ibuprofen, but that is just my personal opinion, and if people choose to ingest those sort of drugs, that is their choice to make. They have an unalienable right to do so.

What makes it an unalienable right? If they are not harming anyone because of this choice then that choice is made by right.

Originally posted by intrepid
OK, a question. You mentioned "victimless crime" when I brought up crack and prostitution. Now you say they were looking for drugs. Also about "prioritizing". Are you saying that drugs are a victimless crime?

Are you suggesting that he would have been arrested for having drugs? Again, where do you live? The cops would just take the drugs, destroy the paraphernalia, and leave. It has nothing to do with the law, it has everything to do with the officer's own drug habits, or financial standings.

Police traffic drugs more than any other group in the world.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
What makes it an unalienable right? If they are not harming anyone because of this choice then that choice is made by right.

Because drugs are not only NOT a victimless crime, you were probably ripped off by a crackhead looking for a score, they are the cause of many crimes. Theft, violence, domination and/or control of prostitutes, Etc. I could go on. Drugs are a HUGE source of crime. I didn't even get into the dealing and distribution of them. Not to mention, um, they are illegal.

Originally posted by Brood
The cops would just take the drugs, destroy the paraphernalia, and leave. It has nothing to do with the law, it has everything to do with the officer's own drug habits, or financial standings.

Police traffic drugs more than any other group in the world.

OK, I'll play. Let's see some links on this. Sorry for not taking your word for it.