reply to post by petrus4
Oh, a cop. Hi!
Oh someone who likes to make assumptions. Hi! Welcome to the conversation late.
Why do I say this? Because there is literally no civilian control of American police whatsoever any more.
Really? How about electing the state and federal representatives who make the law which the police enforce? How about keeping track of how your
representative votes so that you can hold them accountable? How about the civilian review boards that many police departments have that supervise
internal affairs investigations? How about State's Attorneys who also review just about everything the police do from investigation of crime to
internal investigation?
You must have forgotten about those.
It's become completely normal for an American police officer to assume that civilians are obligated to obey literally every word that comes out of
their mouths. If said civilians are unwilling to do this, then said civilians are bashed and/or killed, and the police officer will then lie to his
superiors and/or a judge about the civilian's actions, in order to justify his own behaviour.
You are extrapolating a very few bad police officer's actions and making them a representation of the whole. This is incorrect. It is the same
prejudice that plagues any sort of racism. The minority of a race does something bad so then the entire race must also be bad. There are 700,000 to
800,000 sworn police officer in the United States. If you were to tally the number of corrupt cops, you would probably find that they number less
than 1%.
The attitude of the police towards civilians, is now completely adversarial. Contemporary police do not see themselves as public employees. They don't
see their job as being to serve and protect the civilian population. They see us as the Enemy.
How can you claim to have experience with over 800,000 sworn officers to be able to make an appraisal such as that? 1% of 800,000 is 8,000 officers.
Do you claim to have had experience or some sort of insight into the attitudes and demeanor of even 1% of sworn police officers in the United States?
I do not see how that is probable.
So they will bash us, shoot us, wrongfully incarcerate us, torture us in custody...they will do all of these things quite willingly, because they know
that when push comes to shove, every single time their superiors or a judge will back them to the hilt, instead of the civilian public.
Really?
Do a google search and type in just three words. "Police Officer Convicted."
If the system were so slanted in favor of the police, then how were all of these officers convicted in a court of law?
Do another google search and type in just three words. "Police Department Sued."
If the system were so slanted in favor of the police and against the public, then how were all of these police departments sued in civil court? How
did the plaintiffs probably receive a hefty settlement or judgement in the form of cash if judges backed police to the hilt instead of the civilian
public?
It seems you have exaggerated the amount to which police departments and officers are "untouchable."
Because of the legislation introduced to combat the fictitious threat of terrorism, police officers are now fully legally and culturally empowered to
impersonate Judge Dredd, with impunity. Therefore, that is exactly what they do.
Oh really? Name a case where legislation, spawned by the threat of terroism, has allowed a police officer to play judge, jury and exocutioner. Show
me one case where a police officer has arrested someone for a crime and they have been held without trial
Truth is, this is another exaggeration of what really happens and how "terrorism legislation" effects the common criminal. Truth is, it doesnt.
edit on 2-9-2011 by areyouserious2010 because: edit
edit on 2-9-2011 by areyouserious2010 because: edit to add
