It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Respect, Corruption, Law Enforcement and You

page: 9
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 09:25 AM

Originally posted by InnerTruths
reply to post by romanmel

Can you provide proof to such a claim?

Officers have to pass many tests (not only physical) and I am positive the below average IQ would not be able to pass...

Certainly...this article is one in The New York Times:

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:02 AM
Semper mate, I respect your opinion but there are some points which I feel need addressing - namely MY pet peeves about the police force. Yes, I am in Australia and my only personal experience is with Aussie cops but I watch enough American tv and see enough news that I feel there is not much difference between the two.

With that said, my Numero Uno 'pet peeve' is the seeming endless stream of reports of police violating peoples rights (i'm not talking crappy Youtube clips here, I'm talking about verifyable incidents that reach courtrooms), fronting up in front of a judge and while being let off on "Administrative leave with pay" whereas any non-police citizen would be jailed instantly. I'm sorry, but it doesn't matter if you are a cop or not, it doesn't matter whether your job is stressful or not - wrong is wrong. The corruption in the system is evident through this alone.

Secondly - quotas. I'm not 100% sure if the US requires police to fill certain quotas or not but here in Australia it is a common practice. They must arrest X amount of people per day, or pull over X amount of people for speeding etc etc. Am I the only person who thinks that police having quotas is also a recipe for corruption? The amount of people that I know that have been done for speeding or whatever that either swore blind that they weren't or, in several cases, I was in the car with when they were pulled over and can 100% attest to the fact they weren't doing anything wrong - yet the courts ALWAYS side with the police no matter what evidence or testimony might be brought to the table.

Thirdly, a few of my own personal experiences. One being a time I got arrested for possession of cannabis (looooong time ago) - I refused to tell them who I bought it from so I was subjected to several smacks to the head with a thick book. My protests at my treatment were laughed at and I was told that, in no uncertain terms, if I persued that matter I would regret it. Being very young and naive at the time I crapped my pants and held my silence for many years. Now while this might seem like a trivial thing to some people, it left me with a very bitter taste in my mouth and a dislike of police. Another time (not that long after in fact), I had been caught drink driving. I did not dispute this, in fact I requested an adjournment with the first judge I saw so that I could complete a Traffic Offenders Program. Having copmpleted and passed that with flying colours, I fronted up again in front of another judge. This bloke took all of 5 seconds to dismiss my lawyers appeal for leniency due to me doing my darndest to make up for the wrong I had done. He ordered me jailed for 6 months. Obviously I appealed, and notably during the appeal hearing the judge pointed out that he did not understand why I wasn't shown leniency. I found out later that the judge who had sentenced me had a daughter who was killed by a drunk driver.

The point is that the corruption exists, and it is more widespread than many imagine. The reason people are sueing in the first place is because they feel they were wronged. Is it your assertion that these people should just suck it up and not do anything about it - to protect the men who are performing these acts of corruption?

Lastly, and this is just my personal opinion, but methinks the reason you guys get shot at a lot more now is because if the illegality of the drug trade. These blokes have massive businesses to protect - from cops and other criminals alike. Without the illegality these people have nothing to trade and therefore nothing to protect. It also doesn't help that some cops shoot at the very sight of anything that looks like a gun when it's actually a mobile (cell) phone or a wallet or something.

Anyhoo, what started as a few points ended up turning into a long rant - for that I apologise and reimberse whatever crit value my wall-of-text hit you for

P.S. Why do cops taze grannies?

EDIT TO ADD: Forgot to mention this but my grandfather was a detective in the NSW police force. He was one of the lead investigators in one of Australias worst train crashes - The Granville Train Disaster as well as a few high profile murder cases that I cannot remember off the top of my head. He quit and eventually ended up owning an abbatoir - kinda beside the point except that I once asked him why he quit, thinking that it must have been because of stress. He said to me, very pointedly, that he couldn't stand having to pretend to turn a blind eye to the corruption that had taken root toward the latter years of his service.
edit on 24/6/2011 by Kryties because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:08 AM
your right the police deserve no respect what so ever! respect is earned and your all a bunch of overpaid overprotected turds!!! dont expect me to believe that the so called good cops dont hear about or see their so called brothers commit crimes or violate someones constitutional rights and do nothing(fat blue line) help end police oppression by banning unions for public servants! push for legislation that requires checks and balances by creating a non police organsation to police the police.they have proven time and time again they wont police themselves. and teach the pigs whos country this is if your ever on a jury!

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:26 AM
Fresh case

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:27 AM

POLICE = Paramilitary Police Force

I feel that much of this change in the perspective of general public's perception of the Police does have to do with the relatively recent militarization of the Police.

In the days of old we didn't have SWAT, where law enforcement officers went about brandishing automatic weapons,helmets and body armor.

Today the Police all wearThe USMC regulation high and tight haircuts ...

And even LEO speak of us as "Civilians" as if they are still in the military !

There is the divide right there, the US against THEM mentality has been clearly established.

And this carries over to the GOOD GUY vs BAD GUY system we have amongst society today.

This is why the lack of respect is gaining momentum amongst us "Civilians" because we are all looked upon as BAD GUYS because we are not part of the exclusive club of the LEO.

The LEO .....who as one of our own, can do no wrong BTW.

I won't even go into the violence in which Civilians are subjected to by LEO.
As in the recent case of the ex Marine killed in a SWAT Raid on his own home. Another individual, also Latino AND even his Dog were killed in Phoenix, Arizona in his own home by LEO.

How do you think people are going to embrace this type of this violent behaviour ?

It only further perpetuates Fear of the LEO and further dissent by the "Civilian" populous unfortunately.

It is Not exactly the best way to make a good impression upon people by invading their homes and shooting them dead.

You reap what you Sow.

Plain and Simple.

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:33 AM
reply to post by romanmel

Thanks for your reply!

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:34 AM
I'm glad you've taken the time to post your perspective on law enforcement with us Semper. First off, let me say that police do a tremendous amount of good work, most of which passes by unnoticed by the general public. LEO's are like any walk of life and you have people of all dispositions, some are good, some not so much.
I was a wild child in my teens and was always treated well by police in those instances. More often than not, they played the Andy Taylor role and gave me a good talking to then sent me home or called my parents. I was NEVER handled roughly or disrespectfully in my half dozen scrapes with the law. The only time I went to court we had a senile judge who screamed at my friends father who was our Pastor for no reason. Anyway, that was back in the 70's and it was all good in retrospect.
The problems I see today are these:
1) Civil forfeiture laws that actually encourage police to steal private property.
2) An overabundance of ordinances, laws and regulations that are petty in nature and make criminals of honest citizens.
3) The "militarization" of police, the change from blue to black uniforms, the stalhelm SWAT helmets. the Pentagon leftovers sent to police departments including armored cars, machine guns and other goodies.
4) Police recruitment standards have dropped in many departments over the years. I know several individuals who were LEO's that quit due to the increasing number of violent, unethical and unqualified candidates being put out on the streets.

Taken together, these things along with the plethora of "Cop TV shows" have led to the perception by some of the public that no longer are LEO's a part of the community but more a federalized elite community that serves the interests of rich and the state instead of the general public.

I trust your average policeman, sheriff or state trooper myself but I've had encounters with Federal LEA's that were not pleasant in the slightest. I've had my home ransacked by Fed Marshals and 29 felony counts hanging over the head of my wife for a year and a half for something in which she played no part. I've also complained to the FBI about death threats from the KKK only to have them tell me that they could not legally trace the phone records due to a lack of evidence (my word was not good enough). Driving through my yard at night and shooting off guns in the air was again "not enough evidence" even though all my neighbors heard and saw parts of it.

My bottom line is in an emergency if I can't handle the situation myself I will call local police. For anything on a state or federal level, FORGET IT! They have their own agendas and friends they protect and they will do nothing to aid you.

Overall, I think the most important thing LEO's on the street need more of is training in communication skills and learning to come across as more friendly and less threatening. learning how to diffuse situations rather than escalating them by threats of force. Too many rookies think they have to show some hard attitude to make their points and do their jobs.
We need to return to beat cops who know the people in the neighborhoods and the people know them. Relationships are built on trust which is fostered by the kind of interaction that beat cops have and the rappor they establish with the citizens.

We need to get rid of civil forfeiture laws that encourage unethical behavior and other laws that create criminals where there is neither a victim or a breach of the peace.

Thank you for being on the job! You make a difference as your fellow officers do as well.

Do everything you can to get rid of the image of militarization of the police. The people know the difference intuitively and will respond in kind to reasonable, personal interaction with LEO,s rather than perceived Federal mandates and authority. The use of SWAT teams should be limited to known violent individuals and situations but never for delivering warrants and such.

Semper Fidelis, Sic Semper Tyrannis.
Both have an important place in America.


posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:41 AM
The Supreme Court has had some very interesting rulings about the right to resist unlawful arrests.

I state again. The Supreme Court of the United States are the ones who have stated what I am about to post. It is their rulings and Words, not mine. I am just the messenger in regards to these CASE LAWS.

I think its an interesting Historical Perspective of how SCOTUS used to fell about the Constitution, and even maybe why Cops in the past were much more respectful and decent towards Citizens.

This is for Historical Perspective only. And you can look up these cases yourself if you doubt them.

"Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer's life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529. The Court stated: “Where the officer is killed in the course of the disorder which naturally accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law looks with very different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had the right to make the arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right. What may be murder in the first case might be nothing more than manslaughter in the other, or the facts might show that no offense had been committed.”

“An arrest made with a defective warrant, or one issued without affidavit, or one that fails to allege a crime is within jurisdiction, and one who is being arrested, may resist arrest and break away. lf the arresting officer is killed by one who is so resisting, the killing will be no more than an involuntary manslaughter.” Housh v. People, 75 111. 491; reaffirmed and quoted in State v. Leach, 7 Conn. 452; State v. Gleason, 32 Kan. 245; Ballard v. State, 43 Ohio 349; State v Rousseau, 241 P. 2d 447; State v. Spaulding, 34 Minn. 3621.

“When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his assailant is killed, he is justified.” Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80; Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.

“These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence.” Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State, 43 Tex. 93, 903.

“An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery.” (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).

“Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a case, the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self- defense.” (State v. Mobley, 240 N.C. 476, 83 S.E. 2d 100).

“One may come to the aid of another being unlawfully arrested, just as he may where one is being assaulted, molested, raped or kidnapped. Thus it is not an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an officer, even though he may have submitted to such custody, without resistance.” (Adams v. State, 121 Ga. 16, 48 S.E. 910).

“Story affirmed the right of self-defense by persons held illegally. In his own writings, he had admitted that ‘a situation could arise in which the checks-and-balances principle ceased to work and the various branches of government concurred in a gross usurpation.’ There would be no usual remedy by changing the law or passing an amendment to the Constitution, should the oppressed party be a minority. Story concluded, ‘If there be any remedy at all ... it is a remedy never provided for by human institutions.’ That was the ‘ultimate right of all human beings in extreme cases to resist oppression, and to apply force against ruinous injustice.’” (From Mutiny on the Amistad by Howard Jones, Oxford University Press, 1987, an account of the reading of the decision in the case by Justice Joseph Story of the Supreme Court.

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:48 AM
reply to post by xavi1000

WOW this nees its own threadf!!!!!!!

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:49 AM

Originally posted by semperfortis

Absolutely necessary in my opinion!!!

One of the problems with many smaller departments now here in the south is the lack of civilian review. When I worked up north, almost all of the departments had them and they are a wonderful tool for checks and balances.

Quick question for you on this. Does this view line up with the views of the majority of other officers you've known / worked with - or are you the odd man out this?

I'll admit - the reason I'm asking this question - as you are likely aware there are several police sites out on the web specifically for (or about ) police work, "Policeone,, etc". From comments on these sites from what I've assumed to be actual officers my assumption has been that most officers dislike any kind of review in general and hate civilian review in particular. I could be wrong, it could be a "vocal minority" but at least that's the opinion I formed reading their comments.

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 11:13 AM
reply to post by semperfortis

you know i agree with what you're saying to an extent, as far as the tazers and gas being used because of "us", because i can relate. its like what has happened in elementary/middle/high school classrooms over time. used to be if you stepped out of line, you'd get paddled or a ruler over the knuckles. now, and this is personal experience (my mother teaches the 6th grade) if you tell a child wear different clothes because the excessive holes in their brand new jeans violates the school dress code, you will be sued for "mental distress". granted that lawsuit did not hold, however the point remains. we all had that kid in our class in elementary who pushed and pushed simply because the rules allowed it. that kid who would teeter in the middle ground between good behavior and rule breaking in an attempt to bait the teacher into a disciplinary action that "technically" would not be warranted, even though the kid was asking for it.

to me, the people videotaping police officers waiting for them to tell them to stop are those kids that push it. heck, they even sound like it when they respond in their ridiculous ways. i.e. the video that was posted the other day of the woman on her front lawn who was videotaping a routine traffic stop was asked to "back up" and she said something along the lines of "whats back up?". c'mon. you're baiting the officer, obviously, he simply stated he was uncomfortable. wouldn't you be if there were cameras on you 24/7 at your job?

don't get me wrong, i am by no means pro military state, excessive force, martial law, etc. and i have experiences with young cops out to make a name for themselves who have gone above and beyond in situations.

what i'm saying is, there is a time and place for disobedience according to our violated rights as citizens, and these children who bait the authority don't know when that is.

rant over.

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 11:17 AM
To Semper: I know you have no respect for me, I am a "civilian" afterall. But I say this to you. I vote to pay YOUR sorry way and I can vote you into oblivion. It is the height of arrogance and stupidity to belittle your bosses, those who paid your way it sounds like your whole life. What we have let you have we can take away and you are seeing the beginnings of that happening now. I know why you are so afraid and why you are posting this, the response should make you afraid. How does it feel to know your bosses think you are doing a crap job? How does it feel to hear the sound of the millions of "YOU's" who are sick of the bully tactics and are working to defund your sorry arse? I will never vote another dime for LE and will support any cuts in LE offered. I have seen enough true crime go un noticed and know most of you are just dangerous bumps collecting my money to persecute me. Lauugh is on you because we still are the boss and our votes can take you out. I guess you should be scared.

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 11:53 AM

Originally posted by Frogs
Quick question for you on this. Does this view line up with the views of the majority of other officers you've known / worked with - or are you the odd man out this?

At the administrative level I am at now, it is about 40-60 and understand that is an observation and not by any means an exact number.

Street level I would expect more to be against it..

Good post


posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 11:56 AM
This Thread is apparently being used to corral us so called "Conspiracy Theorists" into a discussion on Law Enforcement will likely be used to gather and monitor more public sentiment on various controversial topics by the Govt. data mining operation here on ATS.

Maybe even as far as gaining more candidates for the Red List.

Also, on the contrary, all of the threads recently initiated pertaining to Ron Paul and Barney Franks introduction of Legislation of Legalization of the M-Word were all 404'd.....instantly IMA.

It's very clear as to who runs the show....whether it's admitted by the owners and staff or not.

The Proof is in the Puddin' !

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 01:14 PM

Originally posted by nh_ee

This Thread is apparently being used to corral us so called "Conspiracy Theorists" into a discussion on Law Enforcement will likely be used to gather and monitor more public sentiment on various controversial topics by the Govt. data mining operation here on ATS.

Maybe even as far as gaining more candidates for the Red List.

Also, on the contrary, all of the threads recently initiated pertaining to Ron Paul and Barney Franks introduction of Legislation of Legalization of the M-Word were all 404'd.....instantly IMA.

It's very clear as to who runs the show....whether it's admitted by the owners and staff or not.

The Proof is in the Puddin' !

Duly noted here also, freedom of speech does not include issues surrounding "certain plants", even legitimate legislative discussions which would directly affect how guys like semper did business. I would also wager that if LE took a reasonable stance on such personal issues they would not be reviled as they are becoming. I am however at a loss why such an important social issue is not allowed fodder, that is until a "Super-Moderator" posts from a LE standpoint it is our own fault they hate their bosses because we object to being beat upon. and the thread takes off. And is not given a warning for just plain baiting BS,despite no real debate just insulting insinuations and outright insults by said board representative. Ie; "it is your own fault we use a tazer or gas you. You sue us if we beat your arse" to paraphrase the sentiment. Needs looked into, if not I need to look into where I spend time.

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 01:43 PM
Seimper, I'm still awaiting a reply for my question about the DNC shirt. It was pretty open-ended, so allow for me to be more detailed i the questioning.

The DNC shirts that were sold by the Denver police union, portrays a culture of police brutality towards citizens, and with that said, it gives the perception that police brutality is accepted among your peers. Would you agree with this statement, or not?

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 01:49 PM
reply to post by Evil_Santa

I do not work for the Denver Police, nor have I ever sold Tee Shirts..

Never have


posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 01:53 PM
After my sons issue breaking into the swimming club, I had to explain to him how he has to deal wit police officers.

One of the first things I explained to him is that police officers are not the same as they were when I was a kid.

Let's take one example. 14 year olds and Beer. We used to steal beers from our house, take them to a train trestle, climb down to the middle of the trestle and drink a beer choking it down every sip, and throw rocks into the water, or just talk crap. Dangerous? You know what. Not really. Not anymore than the 10 generations of boys before us who did the exact same thing in the exact same place for the exact same reasons.

When a police officer caught us up there drinking beer and throwing rocks, guess how many of us went to jail?
How many of us had an officer standing on our porch or in our kitchen while they explained to our parents what we did wrong?
Not a single one. He made us climb down, and told us he didn't want to catch us up there again, and the first person that made a smart remark, got clobbered on the ear with a closed fist. He then asked who else wanted to comment.
Not a single one.

As he walked us up hillside to the road, no one said anything. As soon as he got in his car and waived at us to cross the street, the first thought and words I had were " at least he didn't bust us".

I don't like that every now and then we got clobbered on the side of the head by one of these guys. But at the same time, he didn't treat us like fellons and taser us and handcuff us and drag us off to juvenile hall where the privately owned and operated detention center could make a profit off of holding us for court.

That is what I had to explain to my son. Right now, in America, there is money to be made by arresting people and charging them as criminals. He has to think of himself as a commodity that a privately backed justice system NEEDS to keep getting checks written to them by the state. And that kind of human traffic productivity has to trickle all the way down to the individual police officer now.

I told him to think of it like organ harvesting. Imagine that once you become a criminal and are in jail, they can take out your kidney and sell it to a rich guy with Lupus for $30,000.00. What would the world look like then?

He said, "Depending on how many people needed kidneys, it could look like any healthy person is a criminal waiting to be harvested for money".


posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 01:55 PM
reply to post by xavi1000

I like how at the end of the video, the lady is saying that she doesn't give the press there the right to record her. I guess she forgot that the 1st admendment in the Constitution gives them the right.

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 01:56 PM
I'd just like to say that using a broad brush to define any group is usually a bad idea. And saying that "all cops" are bad/good is a flat out lie either way. Different people and even different locales are going to show variances in their behavior.
In my city, for example, the cops are pretty much useless. Now, true, there are probably a few good officers but I have yet to see or hear of them. Keep in mind that I'm only speaking of the city patrol here and not the few state or county police we see.
I, myself have been followed through town 3 times so far this year and pulled over after pulling into my driveway and told "we're just patrolling the streets". Had been stopped in town by 3 cars for a 'seatbelt infraction' (which I was wearing) and had 6 cops walking around my car with their hands on their guns. Listened to an officer in Subway while ordering her meal respond to an emergency call 5 blocks away say, "what? am I just supposed to drop everything and go over there?".
And that's just the things I personally have witnessed in the last 6 months. If you'd like to see some messed up police behavior maybe you should check out some of the goings on in southern Illinois. But don't stand there and tell me that police as a whole are being treated with less respect than before. Maybe that's because they are worse than before.
All the post seemed to me was just more whining about how "rough" it is to be a cop. BFD !! You took the job, knew what it was when you started, and nobody has nailed your feet to the floor. Leave if you don't like it, or make it better. Be the shining example and do what's right, instead of what's expected.

<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in