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.

 

Law Enforcement Officers seem to be exempt from brutality charges because ..............

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2011 @ 03:04 PM
link   
because ,city, county, state and federal laws allow law enforcement officers to , " break the law to inforce the law"!

legalworkshop.org...

The article states

Indeed, they are considered a justifiable and sometimes necessary aspect of undercover policing.

But the article also states

This practice of authorized criminality is secret, unaccountable, and in conflict with some of the basic premises of democratic policing.


Despite its widespread use in covert operations, authorized criminality is the subject of little regulation or guidance.

Which I assume goes beyond undercover work.

So with the other vague laws of probable cause and reasonable suspicion, which give cops a reason to break heads,breaking the law to enforce the law makes it legal to do so.


Breaking the law to inforce the law , is a pandoras box. And once it was opened it cleared the way for police brutality and murder with no accountability.

 

Fixed external source quote. Please read: Posting work by others.
edit on February 10th 2011 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 10 2011 @ 04:38 PM
link   
I believe President Roosevelt was the one that declared all peoples of the United States, are enemies of the United States. Or perhaps it was indeed the United States is the enemy to the peoples Of The United States. Any who let me say, Any if not All Law Enforcement Agency's are not around to do you good. They are indeed their to harm you when was the last time a police officer said to you. Could you please slow down or I will have to write you a ticket? Or knock on your door to tell you theres a wild dog in the area, for your safety please watch yourself? This type of behavior from law enforcement should be expected, since they are supposed to be protecting the public. But it's just creative thinking.The truth is they are taught and trained that if you are not law enforcement YOU are against LAW ENFORCEMENT. Therefore any method thought to be needed to detain or stop the law offender, as found by the Enforcement Officer is or more than likely found appropriate. Not actually legal but usually dismissed without prejudice. Due to the fact near no 1 want's to deal with the repercussion for screwing with the system



posted on Feb, 10 2011 @ 04:54 PM
link   
This is a long read but gets into it in much detail. Worth the time if your interested.


Covert policing necessarily involves deception, which in turn often leads to participation in activity that appears to be criminal. In undercover operations, the police have introduced drugs into prison, (1) undertaken assignments from Latin American drug cartels to launder money, (2) established fencing businesses that paid cash for stolen goods and for "referrals," (3) printed counterfeit bills, (4) and committed perjury, (5) to cite a few examples. (6) In each of these instances, undercover police engaged in seemingly illegal activity to gather evidence or to maintain their fictitious identities. Yet unless these acts are committed by "rogue cops" not authorized to participate in illegal activity, these activities aren't considered crimes. Indeed, they are considered a justifiable and sometimes necessary aspect of undercover policing. This practice of authorized criminality is secret, unaccountable, and in conflict with some of the basic premises of democratic policing. (7) And to the extent that authorized criminality presents mixed messages about their moral standing, it undermines social support for the police. (8) While the practice isn't new, authorized criminality raises fundamental questions about the limits of acceptable police conduct and has been too long ignored. What is authorized criminality? I define it as the practice of permitting covert police officers (9) to engage in conduct that would be criminal (10) outside of the context of the investigation. (11) We can then distinguish it from other covert policing tactics, such as passively deceptive surveillance, or the police adoption of the role of a victim rather than that of a fellow criminal. (12) Excluded too are instances where police may cross ethical boundaries but not legal ones, such as when undercover investigators stage homicides or other fictitious violent crimes in hopes of building credibility. (13) In Part I, I further situate authorized criminality in the context of covert policing, by discussing how undercover operations differ and why undercover police participate in crimes. While empirical data is limited, the available evidence shows that authorized criminality is a widely used aspect of undercover work.


Link



new topics
 
3

log in

join